HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28375 of 2026 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Sri Rahul Saxena, holding brief of Sri Mukesh Joshi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri O.P. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Amarjeet Choudhary, 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. 663 of 2026, under Sections 137(2), 65(1) BNS and Sections 3/4(2) of POCSO Act, Police Station Majhola, District Moradabad, 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 is no allegation of rape in the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 180 BNSS, however, she in her statement under Section 183 BNSS has stated that the she had left her home on her free will and she was in love with the applicant and the applicant established physical relationship with her without her consent. It is further submitted that the age of the victim has been found to be 13 years and 10 months as per her certificate of Class 8th, 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 the medico-legal report of the victim does not support the commission of rape on her as no injury has been found on the internal and external part of the body of the victim. It is also submitted that the applicant has been languishing in jail since 30.6.2026 and he is having no criminal history. It Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mukesh Joshi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Amarjeet Choudhary, G.A., Krishna Kumar Singh, Shalini Pandey Raj @ Priyanshu .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) 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 has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and it is submitted that the victim in her statement under Section 183 BNSS has categorically stated that the applicant committed rape on her and the age of the victim is 13 years and 10 months as per certificate of Class 8th and in the medico-legal report there are signs and hymen of the victim has been found torn at the position of 3 and 10 o'clock. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts. 6. As per the allegation in the FIR, some unknown person is said to have enticed away the daughter of the first informant, however, the victim has been recovered and she has not stated anything against the applicant in her statement under Section 180 BNSS whereas she in her statement under Section 183 BNSS has stated that the she had left her home on her free will and she was in love with the applicant and the applicant committed rape on her by deceit. The age of the victim has been found to be 13 years and 10 months as per her certificate of Class 8th, 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. In the medico-legal report of the victim, no internal or external injury has been found on her and her hymen has been found torn at the position of 3 to 10 o'clock. The applicant has been languishing in jail since 30.6.2026 and he is having no criminal history. 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 BAIL No. 28375 of 2026 2 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- Raj @ Priyanshu 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. 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 BAIL No. 28375 of 2026 3 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 9, 2026 Abhishek BAIL No. 28375 of 2026 4 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad