HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10878 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 08.09.2022, the applicant enticed away the informant’s minor daughter while she was on her way to coaching classes. Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that in her statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, the victim has not alleged that she was enticed away by the applicant; rather, she has stated that she left home of her own accord. It is further submitted that the medico-legal examination does not reveal any corroborative injuries. In her statement under Section 183 BNSS as well, the victim has not supported the prosecution version. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Learned AGA, however, has opposed the bail plea, submitting that as per the school records, the victim was aged 16 years and 8 months. Perused the record. A perusal of the statement of the victim under Section 180 BNSS shows that Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Surendra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Rupesh .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko .....Opposite Party(s) she has disclosed her age as 17 years; she voluntarily left home and went to Sampoorna Nagar, thereafter to Lakhimpur Kheri, from where she contacted the applicant. She then travelled with the applicant to Lucknow, Delhi, and subsequently Haryana. In her statement under Section 183 BNSS, the victim has made certain improvements by stating that she withdrew Rs. 5,000/- from an ATM and then travelled to Delhi and Mumbai on 14.09.2025. There is a lack of corroborative evidence in support of the prosecution case, and the element of enticement appears to be missing. The victim seems to have attained an age of discretion, and the medical report does not substantiate the allegations. Considering the above observations, coupled with the fact that the applicant is in custody since 24.09.2025 and has no criminal antecedents, this Court deems it a fit case to grant him bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Rupesh, involved in Case Crime No. 173/2025, U/S-137- (2) & 87.B.N.S., P/S- Samporna Nagar, District- Lakhimpur Kheri, be released on bail in the aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court. Any other condition(s) which the trial court/concerned court may deem fit and proper, in the circumstances of the case, may also be imposed. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial. November 19, 2025 R.C. BAIL No. 10878 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench