Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:125317 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20577 of 2025 Applicant :- Gaurav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Danish,Rajiv Sisodia Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. Heard Sri Rajiv Sisodia, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Virendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record. 2. Notice was issued to opposite party nos. 2 to 4 vide order dated 20.06.2025 and has been served on the first informant/opposite party no. 2 and other respondents as per office report dated 07.07.2025. Despite service of notice on the opposite parties, no one appears on their behalf. 3. This bail application has been filed by the applicant- Gaurav, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 26 of 2025 under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) B.N.S. and 5(J)/6 POCSO Act, registered at Police Station Heempur Deepa, District Bijnor. 4. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 07.03.2025 by Smt. Rajo Devi against the applicant and Saurabh alleging therein that her daughter having date of birth as 20.07.2010 and is a minor has been lured and enticed away by Gaurav on 04.03.2025 at about 11:30 p.m. At that time Saurabh was also with him. 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 victim was recovered on 21.03.2025 and her statement under Section 180 BNSS was recorded in which she states of going with the applicant out of her own sweet will and marrying him. She further states that then they lived together in Noida as husband and wife. It is submitted further that the statement of the victim under Section 183 BNSS was recorded who then states all the same as stated by her in her statement under Section 180 BNSS. It is submitted that the victim is a consenting party and went with the applicant out of her own sweet will. Further, it is submitted that the Chief Medical Officer concerned opined the age of the victim as about above 18 years and below 21 years and thus she is a major girl. It is submitted that the applicant and the victim have decided to live together and the victim is having a pregnancy also. Paragraph-16 of the affidavit has been placed before the Court for the same. It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history. Paragraph-17 of the affidavit is placed for the same and applicant is in jail since 24.03.2025. 6. Per contra learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the victim is a minor girl aged about 15 years. It is submitted that as per the school records the date of birth of the victim is 20.07.2010 and thus she was aged about 14 years and 8 months at the time of the incident. It is submitted that the victim has delivered a child but the fact remains that at the time of incident she was a minor and since physical relationship was established by the applicant the same is an offence as she was a minor. It is submitted that as such bail application of the applicant be rejected. 7. After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the applicant is named in the F.I.R. and in the statements of the victim recorded during investigation; as per the school records the victim is a minor; allegations of physical relationship have been levelled against the applicant. Since the victim is minor, the same is an offence. The consent of a minor is of no worth. The bail application is devoid of any merit and is liable to dismissed. 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 :- 29.7.2025 PS Digitally signed by :- POOJA SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad