Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:79079 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16261 of 2025 Applicant :- Ankit Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Aun Haider Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Aun Haider, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Lalit Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the informant as well as 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.95 of 2025, under Sections 65(1), 115(2), 351(3), 352 B.N.S., 5L/6 POCSO Act and Sections 3(2)(5), 3(2)(5ka) & 3(1)(Dha) SC/ST Act, Police Station- Karari, District- Kaushambi, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have committed rape with the victim on 15.3.2025 at about 07:30 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. He has nothing to do with the said offence. The FIR is delayed by about one day and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the victim seems to be a consenting party as she has not raised any alarm whatsoever rather she has stated in her statement recorded U/s 183 B.N.S.S. that applicant had established corporeal relationship with her twice before, but has not mentioned the date and time of those incidents. She has stated that on 22.11.2024 the applicant had given his phone number to her and she used to talk to him by using her mother's mobile, which also implies that she was a consenting party. 7. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the victim by her looks seems to be major and her age has come out to be 18 years as per the ossification test report, as such, a leverage of two years may be granted to the applicant on the upper side. 8. Learned counsel for the applicant has also argued that the provisions of SC/ST Act are not attracted as there is no public view of the said incident. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. There is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 18.3.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 9. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that victim was minor as her date of birth, as per the school certificate of Class-10th, is stated to be 3.7.2009, as such, she was 15 years, 08 months and 12 days old only. Therefore, her consent, if any, has no significance in the eyes of law. 10. The Supreme Court in Jaya Mala vs. State of J & K, (1982) 2 SCC 538 and Mohd. Imran Khan vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), (2011) 10 SCC 192 has opined that the radiologist cannot predict the correct date of birth rather there is a long margin of 1 to 2 years on either side. 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 delay in institution of FIR and the statement of the victim recorded U/s 183 B.N.S.S. coupled by the fact that there is no medical corroboration of the incident and she is 18 years old as per ossification test report, 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- Ankit, 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 pressurize/intimidate 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 :- 14.5.2025 Vikas (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad