HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33351 of 2025 Court No. - 66 HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J. 1. Heard Sri Anuj Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vijendra Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record. 2. This bail application under Section 483 BNS has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant, Umesh, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 131 of 2025, under Sections 137 (2), 64 (1) BNS and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Dhanari, District Sambhal. 3. The allegation made in the FIR is that on 21.04.2025 at about 2:30 p.m., minor daughter of the first informant, aged about 17and 1/2 years went from the house. He has further alleged in the FIR that as per the information received by him, the applicant has enticed away the daughter of the first informant. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused-applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this case crime number and is languishing in jail since 25.07.2025. He has no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per the medical report, no enternal/external injuries have been found over the body of the victim. The victim in her statement recorded under Section 180 BNSS stated that she knew the applicant last six months and she was in love with him and on Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anuj Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Umesh .....Applicant(s) State Of Up And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) 21.04.2025 she went with the applicant in Patiyala and lived with him and also made physical relation with him. The victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS has not levelled the allegation of rape against the applicant. There are several contradictions in the statement of informant, victim and FIR version. It is argued that the applicant has neither enticed away the victim nor has committed rape with her and has been falsely implicated the in the present case. There is no independent witness of the alleged incident and the witnesses, whose statements have been recorded by the Investigating Officer, are the family members of the victim and interested witness and the entire prosecution story is false and concocted and frivolous Hence, bail has been prayed for. 6. Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts. 7. Considering all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out. 8. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 9. Let the accused-applicant, Umesh involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions: i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence. ii. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity. iii. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial. iv. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned. BAIL No. 33351 of 2025 2 10. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail. September 25, 2025 v.k.updh. BAIL No. 33351 of 2025 3 (Ashutosh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVI PRAKASH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad