Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:142362 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28459 of 2025 Applicant :- Ashok Patel Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Anjali Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Ms. Anjali Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Dinesh Mishra, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.87 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(1) B.N.S. and 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station- Charwa, District- Kaushambi, during the pendency of trial. 4. 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 victim is a consenting party as is but evident from her statement recorded U/s 183 B.N.S.S., whereby she has stated that she had gone with the applicant all the way to Mumbai and stayed with him for several days. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the victim by her looks seems to be major and she herself told her age to be 18 years and as per the ossification test report her age has come up to be between 18-20 years. The applicant himself is a 21 years old youth. 6. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no medical corroboration of the incident. There is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 5.6.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that as per the school certificate of Class-8th, the date of birth of the victim is 1.1.2009, as such, she was about 16 years, 03 months and 16 days old at the time of offence. She being below the age of consent, the applicant is not entitled for bail. 8. In the case of P. Yuvaprakash vs State Rep. by Inspector of Police, AIR 2023 SC 3525 the Supreme Court has observed that in the absence of records relating to the birth of the victim, no other documents except the Matriculation or equivalent certificate from the concerned examination board or certificate by a corporation, municipal authority or a Panchayat can be relied upon to ascertain the age of the victim. 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the fact that victim had not raised any alarm during the said sojourn and also in light of judgment of the Supreme Court in P. Yuvaprakash (supra), and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, 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- Ashok Patel, 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 evidence during trial. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate 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. Order Date :- 20.8.2025 Vikas (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad