HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34189 of 2026 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Sri Manoj Gautam, learned A.G.A. submits that the notice of the present application has been served upon the informant/opposite party no.2 and C.W.C./opposite party no.3 on 8.9.2026. The receiving endorsements produced by learned A.G.A. are taken on record. However, no one appears on behalf of the said opposite parties nor any counter affidavit has been filed on their behalf. 2. Heard counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. Perused the material available on record. 3. The present bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 102 of 2026, under Sections 137(2), 64(2)(m) B.N.S. and Section 5L/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Bansi, District- Siddharth Nagar, during the pendency of trial. 4. Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The incident is alleged to have occurred on 6.6.2026, whereas the first information report was lodged on 17.6.2026. The delay in lodging the first information report is fatal to the prosecution case. The victim is a major. The age of the victim was incorrectly got registered in the school records by the victim's parents to give her advantage in life. There is no lawful basis for the age related entry of the victim in the school records. As per the report of the medical board dated 23.6.2026, the victim was found aged about 19 years. It is next contended that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. stated that she had voluntarily left her house as her mother slapped her and went to Bansi, Basti Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Surendra Mohan Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Pramod Paswan .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) and thereafter Dehradun. In the said statement there is no allegation against the applicant. However, the victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S. stated an entirely different version. She stated that she had voluntarily left her house and accompanied the applicant to Dehradun, solemnized marriage and established relations with him voluntarily. There is no allegation of any forceful assault against the applicant. It is contended that the material inconsistencies between the statements of the victim recorded under Section 180 and 183 B.N.S.S. discredit the prosecution case at this stage. There is no corroborative evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The applicant is in jail since 30.6.2026 having no criminal antecedents and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. 5. Learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 6. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that the first information report has been lodged belatedly. As per the report of the medical board dated 23.6.2026, the victim was found aged about 19 years. There are material inconsistencies between the statements of the victim recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. and 183 B.N.S.S. There is no allegation of any forceful assault against the applicant. At this stage, there is no corroborative evidence to link the applicant with the offence. Moreover, the applicant has no criminal antecedents and has remained confined for more than three months and after submission of the charge sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 7. 7. Let the applicant Pramod Paswan, involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the conditions that he: (i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; (ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; and, BAIL No. 34189 of 2026 2 (iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses. 8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. October 1, 2026 Manish Kr BAIL No. 34189 of 2026 3 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- MANISH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad