Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:145714 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21627 of 2025 Applicant :- Millan Alias Ram Milan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Lokesh Kumar Dwivedi,Piyush Mishra,Rajneesh Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Prabhakar Dubey Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Lokesh Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Prabhakar Dubey, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Ajay Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State and perused the material on record. 3. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S., 2023 has been filed by the applicant- Millan @ Ram Milan, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 62 of 2025, under Section 87, 137(2), 65(1) B.N.S., Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Khesraha, District Siddharth Nagar. 4. The first information report of the present matter was lodged on 13.04.2025 by Smt. Azrunisha against the applicant alleging therein that on 11.04.2025 at about 9.30 pm her minor daughter aged about 14 years was lured and enticed away by the applicant on a false promise to marry. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the present case is a case of consent. It is submitted that the victim in her statements during investigation has stated that she went with the applicant out of her own sweet-will and they wanted to marry each other. It is submitted that the C.M.O. concerned vide his certificate dated 17.04.2025 has opined the age of the victim as about 18 years. It is submitted that the medical examination of the victim does not show any forcible sexual assault on her. It is submitted while placing certificate of a school / Madarsa, the copy of which is annexed at page 29 of the paper-book that although the date of birth of the victim therein is recorded as 02.03.2010 but reading of the same goes to show that she attended the said school only for a month and thus the same would not be reliable and cannot be trusted. It is submitted that the certificate of the C.M.O. concerned is more authentic and should be given credence over the certificate of the school. While placing paragraph 17 of the affidavit it is submitted that the investigation in the matter has concluded and charge-sheet has been submitted. The applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 19 and is in jail since 17.04.2025. 6. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that as per the prosecution version and also the school records as attended by the victim she is aged about 14 years and her date of birth as recorded therein is 02.03.2010. It is submitted that since the victim is a minor her consent cannot be looked into. 7. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and perusing the records including the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the first informant and rejoinder affidavit to the same, it transpires that the age of the victim as disclosed is 14 years. The school records show her date of birth as 02.03.2010. She was thus aged about 14 years at the time of the incident. The same at this stage would prevail over the opinion of the C.M.O. concerned. The victim is a minor girl. The consent of a minor is of no worth. No ground for bail is made out. 8. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court does not find it a fit case for bail, hence, the bail application is rejected. 9. Pending application (s), if any, shall stand disposed of. Order Date :- 23.8.2025 AS Rathore (Samit Gopal,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad