Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:88271 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9534 of 2025 Applicant :- Rinku Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Abrar Ahmad Siddiqui,Mohammad Ahmar Malik Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. As informed by learned AGA, notice to the informant has been served on 03.03.2025 but none is present on behalf of the informant. 2. Heard Sri Mohammad Ahmar Malik, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Deepak Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 216 of 2024, under Sections 64(2)m, 351(2) of BNS and Sections 5L/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Dhanapur, District Chandauli, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have established corporeal relationship with the victim on the false promise of marriage and had subsequently refused to comply with the said promise. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. 6. Learned counsel has also stated that the victim is aged about 17 years as per the FIR and the applicant himself is a youth aged about 24 years. It is a clear cut case of false implication. The victim by her looks seems to be major, although as per school certificate of class-VIIIth, date of birth of the victim is stated to be 01.02.2008, as such she was marginally less than 17 years old, which has no evidentiary value in the light of Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. 7. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 24.12.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history. 9. In the case of P. Yuvaprakash vs State Rep. by Inspector of Police, AIR 2023 SC 3525, the Supreme Court has observed that in the absence of records relating to the birth of the victim, no other documents except the Matriculation or equivalent certificate from the concerned examination board or certificate by a corporation, municipal authority or a Panchayat can be relied upon to ascertain the age of the victim. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, nature of offence, age of the victim and also there being no medical corroboration of the incident, I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant- Rinku Kumar, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 13. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 23.5.2025 Sumit S (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad