Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:142486 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28393 of 2025 Applicant :- Gaurav Son Of Sri Raghuvir Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Through Principal Secretary Home Government Of U.P. At Lucknow And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Dwijendra Prasad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Learned State Law Officer has informed that notice to the informant has been served on 7.8.2025. 3. Heard Sri Dwijendra Prasad, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Amit Kumar, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. 4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.127 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 87, 70(2) B.N.S. and 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station- Jasrana, District- Firozabad, during the pendency of trial. 5. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have enticed away the minor daughter of the informant aged about 16-17 years in the night of 12/13.5.2025. 6. 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 about fourteen hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the time of elopement of the victim speaks volume of her consent. The consent can also be drawn from her statement recorded U/s 183 B.N.S.S., whereby she has stated that applicant had committed rape with her and other four persons were standing guard and after the said incident she went to the coaching institute of the applicant and did not complain it anywhere and she was retrieved by her parents only. 8. It is further argued by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no medical corroboration of the incident. The victim by her looks seems to be major. As per the ossification test report, her age has come out to be 17 years, as such, a leverage of two years may be granted to the applicant on the upper side. There is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 18.5.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 9. Per contra, learned State Law Officer for the State has vehemently opposed the bail application. 10. The Supreme Court in Jaya Mala vs. State of J & K, (1982) 2 SCC 538 and Mohd. Imran Khan vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), (2011) 10 SCC 192 has opined that the radiologist cannot predict the correct date of birth rather there is a long margin of 1 to 2 years on either side. 11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the statement of the victim recorded U/s 183 B.N.S.S. and the delay in institution of FIR, 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. 12. Let the applicant- Gaurav Son Of Sri Raghuvir, 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. 13. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 14. 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