HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26234 of 2026 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. List revised. 2. Second supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record. 3. Heard Sri Kshitij Ram Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Praveen Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri Uma Shankar Mishra, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record. 4. 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. 81 of 2026 under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(m), 351(3) BNS and 5L/6 POCSO Act registered at Police Station Maniar, District Ballia during pendency of the trial. 5. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and on perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under section 180 BNSS, it appears that she is a consenting party. It is further submitted that victim is aged about 16 years, 7 months and 12 days as per certificate of High School and her medico legal report does not support the allegation of commission of rape on her. However, the victim in her statement under section 183 BNSS has stated that she was in love with the applicant for the last two years and physical Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kshitij Ram Dubey, Pramod Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Abhishek Kumar, G.A., Naveen Pandey, Praveen Kumar Pandey Kamla Verma .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) relationship was established between them by mutual consent and they also entered into matrimonial alliance. It is further submitted that the applicant is said to have recorded a video of the physical relationship but no such video or photograph as alleged has been recovered during investigation. It is further submitted that chargesheet in the case has already been filed and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 15.6.2026. It is further submitted that criminal history of the applicant has been duly explained in the memo of application and he undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted. It has also been pointed out that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial. 6. 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 a case under POCSO Act has been registered against the applicant in which arrest of the applicant was stayed by a Division Bench of this Court. It is further submitted that applicant is aged about 35 years and he has taken contrary grounds in the memo application. Learned AGA submits that the victim is aged about 16 years and 7 months and her consent is immaterial. 7. As per the FIR, applicant and other accused persons are said to have enticed away the daughter of the first informant, however the victim is has been recovered. The victim has stated that she was in love with the applicant and has also entered into matrimonial alliance with him on her own free will. However, in her statement under section 183 BNSS, she has stated that she was in love with the applicant and entered into matrimonial alliance with him, however, the applicant recorded a video of the private moments. No such video as alleged has been recovered during investigation and medical legal report of the victim does not support the allegation of commission of rape on her. Chargesheet in the case has already been filed and the applicant has been languishing in jail since 15.6.2026. 8. Upon considering the totality of facts, nature and the evidence reflected from record and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail. Hence, the present bail application is ALLOWED. 9. Let the applicant Kamla Verma involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned BAIL No. 26234 of 2026 2 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 not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of B.N.S.S. (iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial court. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. 10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 11. It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order. September 8, 2026 Madhurima BAIL No. 26234 of 2026 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHURIMA GARG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad