HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38796 of 2024 Court No. - 65 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J. 1. Notice issued to the first informant has been served as is evident from the perusal of the report dated 07,.01.2025 sent by concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Maharajganj. 2. List revised. None appears for the informant of the case. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Chandan Singh the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire material available on record. 3. The applicant-Tufail has filed the instant bail application with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Crime No.188 of 2024, under Sections 363, 366, 376(DA), 120B, 343, 504, 506 I.P.C., and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Puranderpur, District Maharajganj, during the pendency of the trial. 4. The prosecution story in brief is that the informant lodged a F.I.R. dated 10.07.2024 with the averments that on 29.06.2024 at about 04:00 P.M., the applicant, along with his father namely, Syed Ali alias Koil and his mother have enticed away his minor daughter aged about 15 years on the pretext of marriage. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the incident is alleged to occurred on 29.06.2024, whereas the F.I.R. has been lodged on 10.07.2024 without there being any plausible explanation of such an inordinate delay for the offence under Sect ions 363, 120-B, 504, 506 I.P.C. Learned counsel further argued that after investigation charge sheet has been submitted under Sections 363, 366, 376 (DA), 120-B, 343, 504, 506 I.P.C., and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act. Learned counsel further submits that victim was recovered after three days and she stated as per instructions of her parents. Learned counsel further argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Karuna Nand Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Tufail .....Applicant(s) State Of Up And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 28.07.2024. It is thus contended that the applicant is entitled for bail. 5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the State has contended that there is specific allegation against the applicant. He next submits that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. 6. Perusal of the record shows that the the victim is minor. The applicant has been assigned specific role in commission of alleged offence. The victim has fully supported the prosecution version in her statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 B.N.S.S. Apart from the aforesaid, the medical evidence also corroborates with the prosecution version. 7. Keeping in view submissions of learned counsel for the parties, gravity of offence, nature of allegations and all the attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I do not find any good reason to exercise my discretion in favour of the accused-applicant. 8. Accordingly, the bail application stands rejected. October 16, 2025 S.Ali BAIL No. 38796 of 2024 2 (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad