HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41935 of 2025 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant is taken on record. 2. Heard Shri Ray Sahab Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Suresh Kumar Maurya, holding brief of Shri Bhaiya Ram along with Ms. Sushila Yadav, learned counsel for the first informant and Shri R.B. Chaudhary, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 436 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1), 351(3) of B.N.S. and Section 5L/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Mainpuri, during the pendency of the trial. 4. 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 the age of the victim has been found to be 18 years as per ossification test, however, her age has been found to be 13 years as per first information report and the victim has already been examined before the learned trial Court and she has stated that no physical relationship was established between her and the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant is having no criminal history and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 22.07.2025 and since the victim has already been examined and there is no chance of tampering of evidence, in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dhiraj Kumar, Rahul Kumar Yadav, Ray Sahab Yadav, Sharad Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Bhaiya Ram, G.A., Sushila Yadav Rajanesh @ Rajaneesh .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for the first informant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and it has been submitted by them that the victim is a minor girl aged about 13 years as per FIR and the victim in her statement recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS has stated that the applicant established physical relationship with her consent and she is a minor girl and therefore, her consent is immaterial. 6. As per first information report, the applicant is said to have enticed away the daughter of the first informant aged about 13 years, however, the victim has been recovered and the age of the victim has been found to be 18 years as per ossification test, however, her age has been found to be 13 years as per first information report and the victim has already been examined before the learned trial Court and she has stated that no physical relationship was established between her and the applicant. It is further submitted that the applicant is having no criminal history and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 22.07.2025 and since the victim has already been examined and there is no chance of tampering of evidence. 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. Accordingly, the present application is ALLOWED. 9. Let the applicant- Rajanesh @ Rajaneesh 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 BAIL No. 41935 of 2025 2 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. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 11. 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. 12. 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. 13. Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the applicant through Jail Superintendent, Mainpuri 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. October 7, 2026 RKM BAIL No. 41935 of 2025 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAJESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad