HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27790 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Dinesh Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Kumar Ankit Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant as well as Ms. Ifrah Islam, learned State Law Officer and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 419 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 87, 333, 324(4), 76 of BNS and Section 7/8 of POCSO Act, Police Station Saraikhwaja, District Jaunpur, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have enticed away the minor daughter of the informant on 05.07.2025. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. The FIR is delayed by two days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsel has next stated that the victim seems to be a consenting party as is but evident from her statement recorded under section 183 BNSS, rather the story as narrated by the victim cannot be believed as she has stated that the applicant had broken open the gate and then abducted her and after gagging her mouth, had tried to commit her rape but she somehow escaped from the clutches of the applicant and Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Bhagyawati Verma, Dinesh Kumar Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Kumar Ankit Srivastava, Yash Kumar Daksh Monu Alias Arun .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) reached her home and narrated the story to her mother who instead scolded her and had beaten her up. 7. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 17.07.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Learned counsel for the informant as well as learned State Law Officer have vehemently opposed the bail application. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record and taking into consideration the fact that no broken gate was observed by the Investigating Officer, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant- Monu alias Arun, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses. iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed. 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 12. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. September 11, 2025 Sumit S BAIL No. 27790 of 2025 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad