Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:74626 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14312 of 2025 Applicant :- Monu Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Madhu Kumar Ram,P.K. Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. As informed by learned State Law Officer, notice to the informant has been served on 01.04.2025 but none is present on behalf of the informant. 2. Heard Sri P.K. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer and also perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 12 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) of BNS and Sections 3/4(2) of POCSO Act, Police Station - Jamaniya, District - Ghazipur, during the pendency of trial. 4. 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. The FIR is delayed by about three days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 5. Learned counsel has also stated that the victim is the consenting party as is evident from her statement recorded u/s 183 BNSS whereby she has stated that she had travelled with the applicant to several places. It is argued that the victim has not raised any alarm whatsoever during the said sojourn with the applicant. It is true that the victim is minor and as per ossification test report, her age has come out to be between 14 to 16 years, as such, a leverage of two years may be granted to the applicant on upper side in light of law laid down by Supreme Court. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. 6. Learned counsel has next stated that there is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 22.01.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Per contra, learned State Law Officer 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. 8. With respect to the age of the victim, a leverage of two years can be granted to the applicant on the upper side in light of the judgement of Supreme Court passed in Jaya Mala Vs. State of J & K, (1982) 2 SCC 538 and Mohd. Imran Khan vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), (2011) 10 SCC 192, whereby it has been opined that the radiologist cannot predict the correct date of birth rather there is a long margin of 1 to 2 years on either side. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, delay in lodging the FIR and also considering the statement of the victim recorded u/s 183 BNSS, I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant- Monu 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 will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 12. 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:- 8.5.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad