Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:83023 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17092 of 2025 Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Gupta Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Maneesh Mani Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Arvind Singh, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri R.P. Patel, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 0057 of 2024, under Sections 363, 366, 376(3) and 506 IPC and 3/4(2) POCSO Act, Police Station Obra, District Sonbhadra, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have enticed away the minor daughter of the informant on 5.4.2024 at about 2.00 am. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by about thirteen hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. It is further argued that the victim is the consenting party, as is evident from her statement recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C., whereby she has gone with the applicant all the way to Azamgarh and thereupon to Delhi and Goa and did not raise any alarm, whatsoever and she has stated that the applicant had married her in a temple. The timing of enticing away itself indicates her consent. 7. As per ossification test report, the victim is 16-17 years old, as such, a leverage of two years may be granted to the applicant on the upper side. 8. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 24.7.2024. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 9. Learned State Law Officer and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that as per school certificate, the victim is 14 years, 11 months and 21 days, as such, her consent, if any, cannot be taken into consideration in the eyes of law. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, the fact that the victim is the consenting party and the delay in institution of FIR, 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. 11. Let the applicant- Pradeep Kumar Gupta, 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. (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. 12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 13. 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 Shalini (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad