Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:101484 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22491 of 2025 Applicant :- Rahmat Ali Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Keshari Nath Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Keshari Nath Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ram Prakash Shukla, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record. 3. This bail application under Section 483 BNSS has been filed by the applicant-Rahmat Ali, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.195 of 2025, under Sections 69, 87, 89, 123, 115(2), 351(3), 352 B.N.S., P.S. Katghar, District Moradabad. 4. The FIR of the matter was lodged on 11.04.2025 by Haneef against the applicant and Mohd. Saeem alleging therein that his daughter aged about 18 years has been lured and enticed away by the applicant on 7.4.2025 at about 3 p.m. She has taken away jewellery and Rs.20,000/- cash kept in the house. He has searched his daughter but she could not be traced. 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 the applicant and the victim were in consensual relationship and physical relationship was established between them with consent. The victim in her statements recorded during investigation has stated that around 7-8 months prior she became pregnant because of the relationship with the applicant and the said pregnancy was aborted and at that point of time, there was no complaint made by the victim or her family members to any authority but later on the present FIR has been lodged. The case of the prosecution is that the applicant used to state to the victim that he would marry her but he did not marry her and in the meantime they indulged in physical relationship. It is further argued that the C.M.O in the medical examination has opined the age of the victim to be 20 years, as such she is a major. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 33 of the affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 10.05.2025. 6. Per contra learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail. 7. After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the victim as per medical examination report is aged about 20 years, as such she is a major. While leaving the house, she took away jewellery and cash money, the same shows that she went out of her own sweet-will. Even 7-8 months earlier she became pregnant and the said pregnancy was aborted but there was no complaint whatsoever. The discussion of marriage between the parties did not materialize. 8. Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 9. Let the applicant-Rahmat Ali, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever. ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever. (iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that she/he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure her/him presence proclamation under section 84 BNSS, 2023 may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against her/him, in accordance with law, under section 209 BNS, 2023. (v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 351 BNSS, 2023. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against her/him in accordance with law and the trial court may proceed against her/him under Section 269 BNS, 2023. (vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant. 10. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. 11. The bail application is allowed. 12. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. (Samit Gopal, J.) Order Date :- 1.7.2025 Gaurav Kuls Digitally signed by :- GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad