Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:142409 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19807 of 2025 Applicant :- Govinda Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ajit Dwivedi,Akanksha Tripathi,Priyanka Divedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. As informed by learned A.G.A., notice to the informant has been served on 05.06.2025 but none is present on behalf of the informant even in the revised call. 2. Heard Sri Ajit Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 99 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 65(1), 87 of BNS and Section 5L/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Mundhapande, District Moradabad, during the pendency of trial. 4. 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. 5. Learned counsel has next stated that the victim by her physical appearance seems to be major, although as per school certificate of class-Vth, date of birth of the victim is stated to be 20.04.2010, as such her age has come out to be about 15 years but the said document has no evidentiary value being hit by Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act. 6. Learned counsel has next stated that the victim is a consenting party as is but evident from her statement recorded under section 183 BNSS, rather she has not leveled any allegation of sexual assault against the applicant. There is no medical corroboration of the said incident. 7. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 31.03.2025 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. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application. 9. In the case of P. Yuvaprakash vs State Rep. by Inspector of Police, AIR 2023 SC 3525, the Supreme Court has observed that in the absence of records relating to the birth of the victim, no other documents except the Matriculation or equivalent certificate from the concerned examination board or certificate by a corporation, municipal authority or a Panchayat can be relied upon to ascertain the age of the victim. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record and taking into consideration the fact that the victim is a consenting party coupled by the fact that there is no medical corroboration of the said incident, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant- Govinda, 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. 12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 13. 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 :- 20.8.2025 Sumit S (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad