Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:83121 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17025 of 2025 Applicant :- Sanni Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Arshad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Mohd. Arshad, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri V.K.S. Parmar, 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 08.05.2025. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.439 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 65(1) B.N.S. and Section 3/4(2) POCSO Act, Police Station Kaushambi, District Ghaziabad, during the pendency of trial. 5. 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 about two days 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 as per school certificate, her date of birth is 25.01.2010, as such, her age comes out to be 14 years, 8 months and 21 days on the date of occurrence. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that the said document has no evidentiary value being barred by Section 94 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 18.10.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 8. In the case of P. Yuvaprakash vs State Rep. by Inspector of Police, AIR 2023 SC 3525, the Supreme Court has 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. 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, 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- Sanni, 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. 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 :- 19.5.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad