Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:71807 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15001 of 2025 Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Anju Yadav,Ashutosh Singh,Satyam Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Satyam Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar, 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 22.04.2025. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.75 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) B.N.S. and Section 3/4(2) POCSO Act, Police Station Indargarh, District Kannauj, during the pendency of trial. 5. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have enticed away the daughter of the informant on 17.03.2025 at about 9:30 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 more than one day 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 by her looks seems to be major, although she herself told her age to be 15 years. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the said age has been suppressed. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 20.03.2025 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. 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 in institution of the FIR and there being no medical corroboration of the incident coupled with the fact that the victim seems to be a consenting party, 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- Pankaj Kumar, 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 :- 6.5.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad