Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:122056 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18345 of 2025 Applicant :- Surjanand @ Surajmal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Deepak Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjeev Kumar Khare,Vinay Kumar Srivastava Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant today is taken on record. 2. Heard Sri Vipin Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pramod Kumar Vishwakarma, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Pranshu Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 122 of 2025, under Sections 87, 352, 351(3) of BNS, Police Station Line Bazar, District Jaunpur, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, applicant is stated to have enticed away the daughter of the informant on 07.03.2025 at about 3 a.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 as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by about 15 days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has further stated that the victim is aged about 29 years and is a consenting party. The applicant has nothing to do with the said offence. The allegations are per se false. Even the statement of the victim recorded under section 183 BNSS indicates that there was an attempt by the applicant to marry the victim, as such the applicant is entitled for bail. 7. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 03.04.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Per contra, learned AGA and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the applicant had married the victim in Arya Samaj Temple at Prayagraj and he has misused his clout as he was already married earlier on and there is a litigation going on between the estranged husband and wife. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the delay in institution of the FIR, I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant- Surjanand @ Surajmal, 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 the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 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 :- 24.7.2025 Sumit S (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad