HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31646 of 2026 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Shri Rajveer Chaurasiya, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Ashish Kumar Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. At the very outset, learned AGA submits that the notice has been served on the first informant. 2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 162 of 2025, under Sections 64(1), 87, 137(2), 351(3) of B.N.S. and Section 3/4(2) of POCSO Act, Police Station Srinagar, District Mahoba, during the pendency of the trial. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case though there is no incriminating material against him. It is further submitted that there are material contradictions in the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS as the victim in her statement recorded under Section 180 BNSS has stated that she had left her home on her own free will and had gone along-with the applicant and lived with the applicant for one month and 10-12 days and physical relationship was established between them, whereas, the victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS has stated that she had left her home on her own free will and had gone alongwith the applicant, where, the applicant where the applicant established physical relationship without her consent. It is further submitted that the age of the victim has been found to be 16 years as per ossification test and the age of the victim has been found to be 13 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Bhaskar Bhadra, Rajveer Chaurasiya Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Pradeep Dhimar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) years and 10 months as per school records of Class V, however, there is no certificate of high school or certificate of school first attended. It is further submitted that the medico legal report does not support the allegation of commission rape on her. It is further submitted that the applicant is having no criminal history and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 02.10.2025, in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and it has been submitted by him that the victim is a minor girl aged about 13 years and 10 months as per school records of Class V and the age of the victim has been found to be 16 years as per ossification test. 5. As per first information report, the daughter of the first informant had gone msising, however, the victim has been recovered and there are material contradictions in the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS as the victim in her statement recorded under Section 180 BNSS has stated that she had left her home on her own free will and had gone along-with the applicant and lived with the applicant for one month and 10-12 days and physical relationship was established between them, whereas, the victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS has stated that she had left her home on her own free will and had gone along-with the applicant, where, the applicant where the applicant established physical relationship without her consent. It is further submitted that the age of the victim has been found to be 16 years as per ossification test and the age of the victim has been found to be 13 years and 10 months as per school records of Class V, however, there is no certificate of high school or certificate of school first attended. It is further submitted that the medico legal report does not support the allegation of commission rape on her. It is further submitted that the applicant is having no criminal history and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 02.10.2025. 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 BAIL No. 31646 of 2026 2 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. Accordingly, the present application is ALLOWED. 8. Let the applicant- Pradeep Dhimar 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 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. 9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 10. 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. 11. It is further directed that the trial court shall send the release order to the concerned jail through Bail Order Management System (BOMS) to BAIL No. 31646 of 2026 3 ensure early release of the applicant. 12. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through Jail Superintendent, Mahoba 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 RKM BAIL No. 31646 of 2026 4 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad