Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:91657 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17210 of 2025 Applicant :- Ali Hassan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- Akhilesh Srivastava,G.A.,Saksham Srivastava Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Saksham Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant, as well as Sri S.D. Maurya, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 0405 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 87, 64, 127(3) B.N.S. and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Roravar, District Aligarh, 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 12.10.2024 at about 3.00 pm. 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 six days 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 183 B.N.S.S., as she had gone with the applicant to several places and did not raise any alarm, whatsoever. The said statement recorded u/s 183 B.N.S.S. is self-contradictory. The victim, by her looks, seems to be major, although, as per ossification test report, she is 16-17 years old, as such, a leverage of two years may be granted to the applicant on the upper side. 7. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 29.10.2024. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the victim was minor, being 16-17 years old, as per ossification test report, as such, her consent, if any, cannot be taken into consideration in the eyes of law. 9. 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. 10. Let the applicant- Ali Hassan, 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. 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 :- 28.5.2025 Shalini (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad