Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:131550 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24186 of 2025 Applicant :- Amit Saroj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ankita Gupta,Balram Pratap Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sujeet Kumar Rai Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Balram Pratap, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sujeet Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the first informant/opposite party no. 2, Sri Birendra Pratap Singh, learned A.G.A. and perused the material on record. 3. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Amit Saroj, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 143 of 2025, under Sections 87, 137(2), 351(2), 352, 131, 64(1) B.N.S., 2023 and Section 5/6 POCSO Act, P.S. Kerakat, District Jaunpur. 4. The F.I.R. of the matter was lodged on 30.5.2025 by Satiram Saroj@Satai against the applicant and two other accused alleging therein that on 19.5.2025 at about 03:00 a.m. his neighbour Chandrika Saroj and his wife Samwata Saroj exhorted their son Amit Saroj (the present applicant), who then allured and enticed away his daughter. Date of birth of his daughter is 01.01.2011. When he came to know about it he went to the house of Chandrika to ask where he was abused and threatened of life. They were adamant to beat him and chased him for assault by carrying weapons in their hands. He somehow saved himself and came back. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the victim in her statement recorded during investigation states that she was knowing the applicant since before and slowly-slowly they developed love between themselves. On the day of incident without telling anyone she came outside the village where the applicant was waiting in a vehicle and then they went from there to Jaunpur from where they went to Allahabad by bus and then by train they went to Mumbai where they married each other and lived there as husband and wife. It is submitted that the present case is a case of consent. It is submitted that C.M.O. concerned has opined the age of the victim about 18 years. It is submitted that the applicant is having no criminal history as stated in para-16 of the affidavit and is in jail since 01.06.2025. 6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the first informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the victim is a minor girl and her date of birth, as per school records, is 01.01.2011 and as such she was aged about 14 years at the time of incident. It is submitted that since the victim is minor her consent cannot be looked into. It is submitted that the applicant is named in the F.I.R. and also in the statement of the victim recorded during investigation and there is allegation of his establishing physical relationship with her which is an offence. It is submitted that as such the prayer for bail be dismissed. 7. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the victim is a minor girl aged about 14 years as per school records and consent of a minor is of no worth. 8. Looking to fact and circumstances of the case, nature of evidence and gravity of offence, I do not find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. 9. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected. (Samit Gopal,J.) Order Date :- 5.8.2025 Naresh Digitally signed by :- NARESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad