HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31707 of 2026 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Sri Ram Raj Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Uma Shanker Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and Miss Haya Rizvi, learned counsel for the first informant. 2. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 69 of 2026, under Sections 137(2), 65(1) BNS and Sections 3/4(2) of POCSO Act, Police Station Khurja Dehat, District Bulandshahar during the pendency of the trial. 3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the 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 in her statement under Section 180 BNSS has stated that she had left her home on her free will and the applicant established physical relationship with her on her consent whereas in her statement under Section 183 BNSS she has stated that the applicant established physical relationship without her on her consent. It is further submitted that the age of the victim has been found to be 16 years as per FIR and as per her statement and 15 years and 04 months as per her certificate of school first attended. It is further submitted that initially the victim has refused to undergo medico-legal examination, however, on the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Ram Raj Pandey, Shubham Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s): Ahamad Farhan, G.A., Haya Rizvi Amir .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) same day the medico-legal examination of the victim was conducted, however, the same does not support the commission of rape on her. It is also submitted that the applicant has been languishing in jail since 25.3.2026 and he is having no criminal history. It is lastly submitted that in case the applicant is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. 4. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts, however, it is submitted that the victim is a minor girl aged about 15 years and 04 months as per her certificate of school first attended and the victim in her statement recorded under Section183 BNSS has stated that the applicant committed rape on her. 5. As per the allegation in the FIR, the applicant is said to have enticed away the daughter of the first informant, however, the victim has been recovered, however, there appears to be material contradictions in the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS as she in her statement under Section 180 BNSS has stated that she had left her home on her free will and the applicant established physical relationship with her on her consent whereas in her statement under Section 183 BNSS she has stated that the applicant established physical relationship without her on her consent. The age of the victim has been found to be 15 years and 04 months as per her certificate of school first attended and the medico-legal report of the victim does not support the commission of rape on her. The applicant has been languishing in jail since 25.3.2026 and he is having no criminal history. 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 BAIL No. 31707 of 2026 2 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- Amir 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 BAIL No. 31707 of 2026 3 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 Abhishek BAIL No. 31707 of 2026 4 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad