Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:69751 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14839 of 2025 Applicant :- Sumit Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Piyush Patel Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. As informed by learned State Law Officer notice has been served to the informant on 21.4.2025. 2. Heard Sri Piyush Patel, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Jyoti Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 as well as Sri R.P. Singh, learned State Law Officer and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 374 of 2024, U/S 137(2), 65(1), 87 B.N.S.,2023 and 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Govind Nagar, District Kanpur Nagar, during the pendency of trial. 4. The FIR was instituted with a suspicion that the applicant might have enticed away the minor daughter of the informant on 24.10.2024 at about 1.00 am. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that 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. It is stated that he has nothing to do with the said offence. It is stated that FIR is delayed by more than three days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has further stated that as per ossification test report, the victim is 16 years old, as such, a leverage of two years may be granted to the applicant on the upper side. 7. It is further stated that the victim seems to be the consenting party, as is evident from the timing of her elopement as she has left her house at about 1.00 am and from her statement recorded u/s 183 B.N.S.S., whereby she has expressed her willingness to marry the applicant after attaining the age of majority. 8. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 8.11.2024. 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 but has not disputed the fact that there is no criminal history of the applicant and the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the applicant. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, the statement of the victim recorded u/s 183 B.N.S.S., the delay in institution of FIR, 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- Sumit 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. 12. 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. 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 :- 2.5.2025 Shalini (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad