Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:82598 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14767 of 2025 Applicant :- Gore Lal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rohit Nandan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri C.P. Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Rohit Nandan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Varun Pratap Singh, 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 07.05.2025. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.315 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 65(1) B.N.S. and 3/4(2) POCSO Act, Police Station Akbarpur, District Kanpur Dehat, during the pendency of trial. 5. As per prosecution story, the FIR was instituted by the informant regarding his missing daughter since 15.07.2024, 7:30 a.m. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is not named in the FIR and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The statement of the informant was recorded by the Investigating Officer on 16.07.2024. Perusal of the case diary indicates that the investigation was started by the Investigating Officer on 15.07.2024 at 2:00 p.m. and he concluded his investigation the same day at 10:00 p.m. He recorded the statement of the informant the same day and he has not whispered a single word against any person whatsoever. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that subsequently the informant had gone to the police station alongwith the victim and given an application at the police station stating that he found his daughter on 16.07.2024 at about 2:00 p.m. in village Rura and had come with her at the police station on 17.07.2024. Learned counsel has also stated that either of the two things is false. Either the victim has not been recovered by the informant on 16.07.2024 at 2:00 p.m or his statement recorded by the Investigating Officer is false, as such, the complete prosecution story fails to stand on its leg. 8. Learned counsel for the applicant has also argued that the statement as narrated by the victim indicates her consent. There is no medical corroboration of the incident as the victim has refused her internal medical examination. She is 14 years old as per her school certificate, which is not admissible in the eyes of law being hit by Section 94 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 24.10.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 9. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed much reliance on the judgment of Supreme Court passed in P. Yuvaprakash vs. State Rep. by Inspector of Police, AIR 2023 SC 3525, wherein it has been observed that in the absence of records relating to the birth of the victim, no other documents except the Matriculation or equivalent certificate from the concerned examination board or certificate by a corporation, municipal authority or a Panchayat can be relied upon to ascertain the age of the victim. 10. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the judgment of Supreme Court passed in P. Yuvaprakash (Supra) and there being no medical corroboration of the incident coupled with the fact that the applicant is not named in the FIR, 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. 12. Let the applicant- Gore Lal, 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 during trial. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 13. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 14. 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 :- 17.5.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad