Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:68234 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11519 of 2025 Applicant :- Ankush Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Madan Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Madan Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Learned State Law Officer has informed that the notice to the informant has been served on 25.03.2025. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.232 of 2024, under Sections 64, 351(3) B.N.S. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Madrak, District Aligarh, during the pendency of trial. 5. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have enticed away the daughter of the informant on 19.11.2024 at about 8:00 a.m. and had committed rape with her. 6. The daughter of the informant could be retrieved on 20.11.2024 at about 6:00 a.m., as such, the FIR was instituted the same evening at 4:27 p.m. 7. 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 ten hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The victim is a consenting party as is but evident from the fact that she had gone with the applicant on a e-riksha and then went by bus and travelled to several places, including by motorcycle, upto Noida and she has not raised any alarm whatsoever. 8. 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 22.11.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 9. Learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that as per high-school certificate, the victim was 16 years, 8 months and 27 days old, as such, her consent has no significance in the eyes of law. 10. 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 in institution of the FIR and there being no medical corroboration of the incident coupled with the fact that the victim had gone with the applicant to several places, 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. 11. Let the applicant- Ankush, 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. 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 :- 30.4.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad