Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:89868 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18243 of 2025 Applicant :- Ajay Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ajai Kumar,Vivek Singh Yadav 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 Ajai Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Pranshu Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 276 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 127(6), 65(1), 87 B.N.S. and 3/4(2) POCSO Act, Police Station Ughaiti, District Budaun, during the pendency of trial. 5. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have enticed away the minor daughter of the informant on 6.12.2024 at about 9.00 am. 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 more than two days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 7. It is further stated that the victim is the consenting party, as is evident from the fact that she has stated in her statement recorded u/s 183 B.N.S.S. that she talked to the applicant at a temple and she was forcibly taken in an ECO van by the applicant to a room. She did not raise any alarm during the said travel in the ECO van. The victim has stayed in the said room for four days, although she has stated that she was raped by the applicant but the said allegations are false on the ground that when she was asked of the meaning of 'rape' by the Magistrate concerned, she kept silent. 8. It is further argued that the victim is 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. 9. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 26.1.2025. 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- Ajay, 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 Shalin (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad