Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:65958 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11030 of 2025 Applicant :- Ramkesh Chauhan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Shekhar Kushwaha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Chandra Shekhar Kushwaha, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arun Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Learned A.G.A. has informed that the notice to the informant has been served on 30.03.2025. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.378 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) B.N.S. and Section 4(2) POCSO Act, Police Station Madhuban, District Mau, during the pendency of trial. 5. As per prosecution story, the FIR was instituted by the informant stating that the applicant had enticed away her minor daughter on 28.12.2024 at about 9:00 a.m. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by about two days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The victim is a consenting party as is but evident from her statement recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S. She has not raised any alarm whatsoever and has gone with the applicant on his motorcycle and stayed with him. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that there is no medical corroboration of the incident. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 08.01.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that as per class-VIth transfer certificate, the date of birth of the victim was 10.03.2010, as such, her age comes out to be 14 years, 9 months and 18 days only. The victim is a minor and her consent, if any, has no significance in the eyes of law. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the delay of two days in institution of the FIR and the fact that the victim seems to be a consenting party as per her statement recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S., and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant- Ramkesh Chauhan, 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 evidence. (ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 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 :- 29.4.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad