No. Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS BA1 No. 1281 of 2025 Hon’ble Alok Mahra, J. Mr. Saurabh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Siddhartha Bisht, learned A.G.A. for the State. 3. Mr. Pankaj Tangwan, learned counsel for the complainant. 4. The applicant – Mohd. Rozwan @ Aman who is in judicial custody in connection with Case Crime/FIR No. 0427 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 64(1) and 87 of B.N.S. and Section 5(L)/6 of POCSO Act, registered at P.S.- Raipur, District Dehradun, has sought his release on bail. 5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 6. In this case, an FIR was lodged by the brother of the victim, wherein, it was alleged that the victim is missing since last day i.e. 23.11.2024 and it was doubted that the applicant have taken her with him. The victim was recovered by the Police on 01.12.2024 and thereafter, the statements of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. were recorded and the applicant was arrested on 01.12.2024. 7. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant and the victim have performed Nikah at Madina Masjid, Agra on 28.11.2024; that in all her statements, the factum of Nikah is not denied by the victim. With regard to the factum as to whether the victim was minor on the date of incident, learned counsel for the applicant would submit that in the Pariwar Register, the date of birth of the victim is shown as May, 2005, whereas, the date of birth in the School Register of the victim is recorded as 17.10.2007. Learned counsel for the applicant would further submit that if the entry in the Pariwar Register is taken as correct, the victim was major on the date of incident and even if the entry in the school register is taken to be gospel truth, then also the victim is of 17 years of age at the time of incident and was fully aware of the circumstances in which she left her home and went with the applicant from Dehradun to Delhi and from Delhi to Agra with the applicant. 8. Per contra, Mr. Pankaj Tangwan, learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the bail application. 9. Having considered the rival submissions and under the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that it is a case fit for bail and the applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail. 10. Accordingly, the present bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties each of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned. (Alok Mahra J.) 17.10.2025 Ujjwal