Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:114798 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18789 of 2025 Applicant :- Raju Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Kumar Mishra,Shireesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Subhash Chand Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Divyanshu Tiwari, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ashutosh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Subhash Chand, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri V.D. Ojha, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record. 3. This bail application 483 of BNSS has been filed by the applicant-Raju, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.544 of 2024, u/s 65(1), 87, 137(2) of B.N.S. and 4(2) POCSO Act, P.S. Tappal, District Aligarh. 4. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 6.11.2024 by Pawan against the applicant and Subhash alleging therein that on 4.11.2024 at about 7 p.m., his daughter aged about 14 years has been kidnapped by Raju, the applicant. The brother of the applicant is also involved in the incident. He suspects any untoward incident against his daughter by the said persons. A report be lodged and action be taken. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the victim stayed for about 12 days with the applicant out of her own sweet-will without any complaint or resistance. It is further argued that there is inordinate delay in recording of the statement of the victim under Section 183 of B.N.S.S. as the same has been recorded after 22 days of her statement under Section 180 B.N.S.S. It is further argued that the victim is a consenting party and had gone with the applicant out of her own sweet-will and stayed with him. Even in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of B.N.S.S., she does not state of any sexual assault but only states that the applicant misbehaved with her, pressed her chest and she is having pain in her lower part of the body, the same does not show any sexual assault on her. Even the medical examination of the victim does not show any sexual assault on her. It is further argued that the applicant is having criminal history of one case which has been explained in para 3 of the supplementary affidavit dated 18.6.2025 which is already on record. The applicant is in jail since 20.11.2024. 6. Per contra learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is named in the FIR, in the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180 BNSS and 183 BNSS. The date of birth of the victim as per school records is 5.8.2009 and as such she was aged about less than 16 years at the time of incident. Since the victim is a minor, her consent cannot be looked into. There are allegations against the applicant as stated by the victim. Even there are allegations of kidnapping against the applicant. The bail application of the applicant be thus rejected. 7. After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is named in the FIR and in the statements of the victim recorded during investigation. As per school records and date of birth recorded therein, she is less than 16 years and thus she is a minor. The consent of a minor is of no worth. 8. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find it a fit case for bail, hence, the bail application is rejected. (Samit Gopal, J.) Order Date :- 16.7.2025 Gaurav Kuls Digitally signed by :- GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad