HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15275 of 2026 Court No. - 65 (Sr. No.27 out of 259) HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Mool Chandra Maurya, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajendra Kumar, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Jai Kishan Chaurasia, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.43 of 2026, under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) BNS and Section 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Etah, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have enticed away the minor daughter of the informant, aged about 14 years, on 30.01.2026. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the FIR is delayed by more than 2 days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The victim is a consenting party, as she had taken away Rs.50,000/- and ornaments from her house. She has stated in her statement recorded under section 183B BNSS that she does not know the applicant and she had left her house peeved by the altercation she had with her mother, as such, the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further argued that it is true that as per school certificate, the victim was minor, but as per ossification test report, her age has come out to be 15-16 years and a leverage of two years may be granted to the applicant on the upper side. The applicant has no Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mool Chandra Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Ajendra Kumar, G.A. Laukush .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) criminal history and is in jail since 08.02.2026. He undertakes to cooperate with the trial and not misuse the liberty of bail. 7. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant and learned State Law Officer have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the applicant is a person carrying heavy clout in society, as he even managed the medical examination of the victim. The doctor conducting her medical examination opined that she was not pregnant, but after persuasion by the informant and an order from the court concerned, a medical board was formed, and it was found that the victim was pregnant by about twelve weeks. The said pregnancy was also terminated at the behest of the informant. The applicant is named in the FIR. The victim was minor as per her Class-X school certificate. Her date of birth is 01.01.2013; as such, she was less than 13 years old at the relevant time, and the applicant is not entitled to bail on account of the victim's minority. 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the fact that the victim had taken away ornaments and Rs.50,000/- cash from her house, and as per the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S., she does not know the applicant and has stated that she left her house on her own after having an altercation with her mother, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima-facie the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 9. Let the applicant- Laukush, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to verification of sureties, with the conditions that he shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the trial court as required. 10. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations herein shall not affect the trial on merits. May 6, 2026 (Ravi Kant) BAIL No. 15275 of 2026 2 (Krishan Pahal,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad