Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:66063 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12800 of 2025 Applicant :- Manjeet Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Antima Rajbhar,Hari Prakash Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Ms. Antima Rajbhar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 341 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) B.N.S., 2023 and Sections 5/6 POCSO Act, 2012, Police Station Kotwali Mau, District Mau, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have enticed away the daughter of the informant on 14.08.2024. 5. 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 months and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The victim is the consenting party as is but evident from her statement recorded u/s183 B.N.S.S., in which, she has categorically stated that she befriended the applicant and had gone with him to Ghazipur, Sekhanpur and has stayed with him as his wife. 6. It has been further stated that victim in her statement also stated that she does not want to live with the applicant. The victim by her looks seems to be major although, she has stated to be 15 years and 9 months as per her school certificate. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 18.10.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, delay of two months in lodging of the FIR, coupled by the fact that victim had stayed with the applicant as per her own statement recorded u/s183 B.N.S.S. and established corporeal relationship with him 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. 9. Let the applicant- Manjeet, 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. 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. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 11. 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 Priya (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- PRIYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad