Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:121379 Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 4566 of 2025 Applicant :- Rahul Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- A.Z.Khan,G.A.,Mohammad Asif Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J. 1. Copy of the statement of the victim under Sections 180 B.N.S.S. and 183 B.N.S.S. as well as the report of the Medical Board dated 21.04.2025 produced by Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned AGA for the State are taken on record. 2. Heard counsel for the applicant, Mr. A.Z. Khan, counsel for the opposite party no. 4/ informant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record. 3. The present Anticipatory Bail Application has been filed with the prayer to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant in Case Crime No. 53 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 115(2), 351, 87, 142, 305(A), 78 of B.N.S. and Section 11/12 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Kamla Nagar, District- Agra. 4. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The incident is alleged to have occurred on 08.04.2025. The first information report was lodged on 11.04.2025. The delay is fatal to the prosecution case. The victim in her statement under Sections 180 B.N.S.S. stated that she left her house voluntarily after a quarrel with her parents and went to a friend's house. She made no allegations of indecent behaviour against the applicant. Upon the victim going into the custody of her parents an entirely different version has been narrated in her statement under Section 183 B.N.S.S.. It is contended that the said statement has been made to aggravate the offence and save the failing prosecution case. The inconsistencies in both the statements of the victim discredit the prosecution case. As per the ossification test report, the victim was found to be aged 17 years. The range of error in determining the age is about two years and the same should be read in favour of the applicant at this stage. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The investigation is still pending. It is next submitted that the applicant has apprehension of his arrest and in case, the applicant is released on anticipatory bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 5. Learned A.G.A. and counsel for the opposite party no. 4 have opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 6. Having regard to the submissions made by counsel for the applicant, considering the nature of accusations, antecedents of the applicant and the fact that the F.I.R. was lodged belatedly, there are inconsistencies in the statement of the victim under Sections 180 B.N.S.S. and 183 B.N.S.S., the fact that as per the ossification test report, the victim was found to be aged 17 years, at this stage, there is no substantive evidence against the applicant, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on anticipatory bail. 7. In the event of arrest, the applicant Rahul Yadav, involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation; (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer; (iii) The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court. (iv) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court. (v) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. (vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of B.N.S.S. 8. In default of any of the conditions, the court concerned is at liberty to pass appropriate orders for enforcing and compelling the same. 9. The application stands disposed of. Order Date :- 24.7.2025 Sachin Mishra Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad