HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32844 of 2025 Court No. - 66 HON'BLE ASHUTOSH SRIVASTAVA, J. Case called out in revised. None has put in appearance on behalf of the first informant despite service of notice. Heard Shri Dinesh Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Purshottam Maurya, learned A.G.A. representing the State respondents. This bail application under Section 483 B.N.S.S. has been moved on behalf of accused-applicant, Suraj Kumar, seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 87 of 2025, under Sections- 69, 89, 351 (3) B.N.S. and 5j(ii)/6, 5L/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station-Bansdih, District-Ballia. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused-applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number and is languishing in jail since 19.10.2024. First Information Report has been lodged on 18.04.2025, by the first informant namely Sharda Devi, with the allegation that before five months, the applicant, who is resident of the same village, has established sexual relation with the minor daughter of the first informant on the pretext of marriage and prepared a video clip of the same. Thereafter, the applicant has several time sexually assaulted the victim due to which the victim became pregnant and thereafter the applicant has aborted the pregnancy at unknown place. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the First Information Report neither the date nor time of the incident has been mentioned. The victim in her statement under Section 180 BNS has stated nothing about the incident and said that she wants to marry with the applicant. The victim in her second statement under Section 180 BNSS as well as 183 BNSS has modified her version as of the First Information Report. She herself has denied from her internal medical examination. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that this is a case of consensual relationship. The victim in her statement herself has stated that she is 16 years of age which may be with variation of two years either way. The applicant has no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of his fleeing from course of justice or tampering with evidence in case of release on bail; hence, bail has been Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dinesh Kumar Gupta, Raghawendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ajeet Ram .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) prayed for. Learned learned AGA has vehemently opposed, but could not dispute the fact that applicant has no criminal antecedents. Considering all those facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, but without commenting on merit of case, a case for bail is made out. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the accused-applicant, Ajeet Ram, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence. 2. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity. 3. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co- operate in the trial. 4. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned. In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail. September 24, 2025 Deepak/ BAIL No. 32844 of 2025 2 (Ashutosh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- DEEPAK KUMAR KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad