Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:83072 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15755 of 2025 Applicant :- Brashpati Pratap Singh @ Rustam Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sitaram Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. As informed by learned AGA, notice to the informant has been served on 08.05.2025 but none is present on behalf of the informant. 2. Heard Sri Sita Ram Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Deepak Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 140 of 2024, under Sections 363, 366, 120B, 376 IPC and Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act and Section 3(2)V of SC/ST Act, Police Station Phoolpur, District Azamgarh, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the named accused Raju is stated to have enticed away the daughter of the informant on 18.03.2024 at about 11 a.m. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by about 3 days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has also stated that the victim is the consenting party as is evident from her statement recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C. whereby she has categorically stated that she had gone with the applicant all the way to Mumbai and has not raised any alarm whatsoever. The victim by her looks seems to be major although as per her High School Certificate, her age has come out to be 16 years. 7. The criminal history of one case has been assigned to the applicant has been explained as in all, two girls had eloped at a go and the applicant has been implicated in the said FIR of elopement of another girl also. He has applied for bail in the said case and the said bail is pending. The applicant is languishing in jail since 03.04.2025 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. Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant. 9. The Supreme Court in the case of Sushil Kumar vs. Rakesh Kumar, (2003) 8 SCC 673, has opined that it is more often in the Indian Society that person shows the age of their wards much below than their actual age. In the case of Brij Mohan Singh Vs. Priya Brat Narain Sinha, AIR 1965 SC 282, this Court, inter alia, observed that in actual life it often happens that persons give false age of the boy at the time of his admission to a school so that later in life he would have an advantage when seeking public service for which a minimum age for eligibility is often prescribed. 10. In the case of Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2020) 11 SCC 648, the Supreme Court has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused by itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail. 11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the delay in FIR and taking into account that the victim is a consenting party, I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed. 12. Let the applicant- Brashpati Pratap Singh @ Rustam Singh, 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 the 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 :- 19.5.2025 Sumit S (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad