Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:87615 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16363 of 2025 Applicant :- Rahul Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Mahendra Pratap Yadav,Pavan Kishore Counsel for Opposite Party :- Alauddin,Fakhruddin,G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Mahendra Pratap Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Alauddin, learned counsel for the informant, 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.468 of 2023, under Sections 363, 366, 120B, 506, 376 I.P.C. and Section 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Mehdawal, District Sant Kabir Nagar, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have enticed away the minor daughter of the informant aged about 14 years on 18.10.2023 at about 7:00 p.m. 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 four days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The victim is major aged about 19 years as per ossification test report. She is a consenting party as is but evident from the fact that she had earlier on gone with the applicant all the way to Mumbai. She has further stated that she had gone to a temple at Maharajganj and married the applicant. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that prior to the instant FIR, another FIR was instituted by the same informant with the allegations on similar lines on 14.08.2023 regarding missing of his daughter. The applicant was on bail in the said case on 22.11.2024, as such, it is a clear-cut case of false implication. The applicant is languishing in jail since 18.04.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application. 8. 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 the fact that the victim seems to be a consenting party, 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. 9. Let the applicant- Rahul, 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. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 11. 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 :- 23.5.2025 (Ravi Kant) (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad