HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31660 of 2026 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Sri Sarvesh Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri B.P. Maurya, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record. 2. The present bail application under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, has been filed on behalf of applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 147 of 2019 under Sections 363, 366, 376D IPC and 5g/6 POCSO Act registered at Police Station Kurawali, District Mainpuri during pendency of the trial. 3. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is not named in the FIR, however, the victim in her statement recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. has specifically assigned the role to co- accused Khushnavi and name of the applicant does not find mention in the chargesheet. However, on the basis of the statement of the victim, learned trial court has summoned the applicant to face trial under section 319 Cr.P.C. It is next submitted that on perusal of the ordersheet of the learned trial court, it appears that initially, summon was issued to the applicant which was not served on him, thereafter on 21.3.2025, summons were again issued to him and then bailable warrants were issued against him. It is next submitted that there is no report regarding service of summon or bailable warrant on the applicant and non-bailable warrants have been issued against him when he came to know about the proceedings of the case, thereafter, he has been arrested and he is languishing in jail since 29.7.2026. It is next submitted that applicant has no criminal history and he is ready and willing Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sarvesh Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Mu Raju Farooki .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) to co-operate in the trial. It is lastly submitted that in case applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. 4. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submits that applicant is not named in the FIR, however, he does not dispute the fact that his name does not find mention in the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. as well as in the chargesheet. 5. As per the FIR, applicant and four other accused persons are said to have enticed away the daughter of the first informant aged about 16 years. The victim in her statement recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. has stated that she is 17 years old and she was in relationship with co-accused Khushnavi. The victim has not named the applicant in her statements nor his name finds place in the chargesheet. However, during trial, on the basis of the testimony of the victim, trial court has summoned the applicant to face trial under section 319 Cr.P.C. As per the ordersheet of the trial court, it appears that summons have been issued against the applicant for the first time on 29.8.2025, thereafter, non bailable warrant have been issued against him on 06.1.2026 and he has been arrested on 29.7.2026 and since then, he is languishing in jail. Applicant has no criminal history to his credit and he is ready and willing to co-operate in the trial. 6. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and taking into account overcrowded jails and heavy pendency of criminal cases before the trial courts as well as considering the mandate of the judgement of the Apex Court in the case of Kapil Wadhawan vs Central Bureau of Investigation reported in 2025 SCC OnLine SC 3038 as well as guideline of this Court in the case of Maya Tiwari Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2024 SCC Online All 6765 regarding grant of bail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 7. Let the applicant Mu Raju Farooki involved in the aforementioned 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, with the BAIL No. 31660 of 2026 2 following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial/investigation sincerely without seeking any adjournment. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. (iv) The applicant shall attend in accordance with the conditions of the bond executed by him. 8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 9. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Verification of mobile number and Aadhaar card of the applicant as well as sureties should be verified by the court concerned. 10. It is further directed that the trial court shall send the release order to the concerned jail through Bail Order Management System (BOMS) to ensure early release of the applicant. 11. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through concerned Jail Superintendent via e-mail or e-prison portal within 24 hours in compliance of the order of the Apex Court in the case of Policy Strategy for Grant of Bail, In Re: Suo Motu Writ Petition (Crl.) No.4 of 2021 decided on 31.01.2023 reported in (2024) 10 SCC 685. September 30, 2026 Madhurima BAIL No. 31660 of 2026 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHURIMA GARG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad