Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:68559 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13334 of 2025 Applicant :- Rohit Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Shahnawaz Shah Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. As informed by learned A.G.A., notice has been served to the informant on 14.4.2025. 3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Pranshu Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. None is present on behalf of the informant. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 110 of 2024, U/S 137(2), 87, 65(1) B.N.S. and 3/4(2) POCSO Act, Police Station Malawan, District Etah, during the pendency of trial. PROSECUTION STORY: 5. One Pappu Bihari is stated to have enticed away the minor daughter of informant, aged about 16 years on 13.7.2024. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT: 6. The applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. He has nothing to do with the said offence. 7. The FIR is delayed by eight days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 8. The victim is the consenting party, as far as the applicant is concerned, as she has stated in her statement recorded u/s 183 B.N.S.S. that she had herself left her house and after hopping to several places, she reached Chandigarh and by tracing the location of the applicant, she reached his house and stayed thereat with him. On 15.7.2024, she married him in a temple. The victim has herself stated that she was retrieved by police from Chandigarh only but her recovery memo indicates her to have been recovered from Etah itself, as such, it is a clear cut case of false implication. 9. The victim by her looks, seems to be major, although as per Class 9th Certificate, she is 15 years old. The said document cannot be taken into consideration in light of Section 94 of The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. 10. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 6.8.2024. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF INFORMANT/STATE: 11. The bail application has been opposed but the fact that there is no criminal history of the applicant has not been disputed. CONCLUSION: 12. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, 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. 13. Let the applicant- Rohit Kumar involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. (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. 14. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. 15. 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 :- 1.5.2025\Shalini (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad