Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:89834 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18234 of 2025 Applicant :- Musahid Ali Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Singh Yadava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Learned A.G.A. has informed that notice to the informant has been served on 18.5.2025. 3. Heard Sri Nanhe Lal Tripathi, learned Advocate holding brief for Sri Rakesh Singh Yadava, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri R.M. Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 52 of 2025, under Sections 64, 137(2) B.N.S. and 3/4 POCSO Act and 3(2), (5Ka), 3(2), (5) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Gahmar, District Ghazipur, during the pendency of trial. 5. The FIR was instituted by the informant against unknown persons by the informant regarding his missing daughter since 10.3.2025. 6. 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 one day and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. There is no time of offence mentioned in it. 7. It is further argued that the victim is the consenting party, as is evident from the fact that she had gone with the applicant all the way from Ghazipur to Varanasi and stayed at a hotel, although she has stated that she was subjected to sexual assault by the applicant but her consent can be drawn from the fact that she did not raised any alarm, whatsoever, during her stay at the hotel. 8. The victim, by her looks, seems to be major, although she is 16- 17 years old as per ossification test report, as such, a leverage of two years may be granted to the applicant on the upper side. The applicant is 30 years old. 9. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 14.3.2025. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 10. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but has not disputed the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the applicant. 11. 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. 12. Let the applicant- Musahid Ali, 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. 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 :- 27.5.2025 Shalini (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad