Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:71905 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15091 of 2025 Applicant :- Ravindra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. 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. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 306 of 2024, U/S 87, 64(1) B.N.S., Police Station Ramala, District Baghpat, during the pendency of trial. 4. The FIR was instituted by the informant stating that his wife, aged about 25 years, has been enticed away by the applicant on 3.11.2024 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 three days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has further stated that the timing of enticing away the victim, i.e. at 1.00 am, speaks volume of her consent. The statement of the victim recorded u/s 183 B.N.S.S. does not inspire any confidence, as it cannot be believed. She has stated that she was taken away by the applicant and his brother Yogendra and she was rendered unconscious and had threatened to put her husband to death. It is not mentioned in the said statement as to how she was rendered unconscious, as such, the applicant is entitled for bail. The matter of consensual relationship has been converted into a criminal case. 7. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 7.3.2025. 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 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. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, the delay in institution of FIR, the timing of enticing away the victim and her statement recorded u/s 183 B.N.S.S., 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- Ravindra 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. 11. 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. 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 Shalini (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad