Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:67346 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13081 of 2025 Applicant :- Ajay Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Priyanka Sharma 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 16.04.2025 but none is present on behalf of the informant. 2. Heard Smt. Priyanka Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Ifrah Islam, learned State Law Officer and also perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 0441 of 2024, under Sections 137(2) & 64 of BNS and Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station - Syana, District - Bulandshahr, 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 one day and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The applicant is not named in the FIR. His name has come up for the first time in the statement of the victim recorded u/s 180 & 183 BNSS. 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 has travelled with the applicant to several places and has not raised any alarm whatsoever. Although, she has stated that the applicant had promised to marry her but subsequently refused to comply with the said promise of marriage. 6. Learned counsel has next stated that the victim by her looks seems to be major although as per her own statement, she is 17 years old and as per school certificate, she was less than 16 years old. It is further stated that there is no medical corroboration of the incident. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 02.12.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 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. The Supreme Court in Pramod Suryabhan Pawar vs. State of Maharashtra and Another, 2019 (9) SCC 608 and Ansaar Mohammad vs. State of Rajasthan and Another, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 886, has stated that entering into any kind of corporeal relationship with a person on the false promise to marry cannot be termed as rape. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, age of the victim and also the judgements of Supreme Court passed in Pramod Suryabhan Pawar (supra) and Ansaar Mohammad (supra), I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant- Ajay, 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:- 30.4.2025 Siddhant (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad