HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31664 of 2026 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Ishwar Chandra Tyagi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Satya Prakash, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri Uma Shankar Mishra, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record. 3. 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. 104 of 2026 under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1), 127(2) BNS and 5(c)/6 POCSO Act registered at Police Station Shahzad Nagar, District Rampur during pendency of the trial. 4. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and there are material contradictions in the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS as she has not stated anything regarding physical relationship between her and the applicant in her statement under Section 183 BNSS. It is further submitted that age of the victim has been found to be 13 years 8 months as per school records of class VIIIth, however, there is no High School certificate or the certificate of school first attended and no radio-logical examination of the victim has been conducted for her age determination. It is further submitted that medico-legal report of the victim does not support commission of rape on her. It is also submitted that applicant, who has no criminal history, has been languishing in jail since 17.6.2026. It is lastly submitted that in case applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ishwar Chandra Tyagi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Nandini Pandey, Satya Prakash Narendra Pratap Singh .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. 5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the first informant opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submit that the victim has stated before the doctor that applicant committed rape on her. 6. FIR has been lodged against unknown alleging therein that daughter of the first informant aged about 13 years had gone missing. The victim has stated that she called the applicant and had gone along with him to his house and lived there and physical relationship was established between them, however, she has stated before the doctor that no physical relationship was established between them and the applicant committed rape on her. Thus, there appears to be material contradictions in the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS and the one given before the doctor. The victim is aged about 13 years and 8 months as per school records of class VIIIth, however, there is no High School certificate or the certificate of school first attended and no radio-logical examination of the victim has been conducted for her age determination. Medico-legal report of the victim does not support commission of rape on her. Applicant, who has no criminal history, has been languishing in jail since 17.6.2026. 7. 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. 8. Let the applicant Narendra Pratap Singh 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:- BAIL No. 31664 of 2026 2 (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 ensure early release of the applicant. 12. 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. 31664 of 2026 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHURIMA GARG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad