HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30937 of 2026 Court No. - 67 HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J. 1. Heard Sri Anil Kumar Savita, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shiv Dutt Shukla, learned AGA for the State-respondents and perused the record. 2. 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. 205 of 2026 under Sections 87, 137(2), 65(1) BNS, 5L/6 POCSO Act registered at Police Station Atrauliya, District Azamgarh during pendency of the trial. 3. At the very outset, learned A.G.A. states that notice has been served upon the first informant. 4. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and there are material contradictions in the statements of the victim recorded under sections 180 and 183 BNSS. It is further submitted that age of the victim has been found to be 13 years as per certificate of class IVth, however, there is no certificate of High School or school first attended and no radiological examination has been conducted for determination of her age. It is further submitted that medico-legal report of the victim does not support the allegation of rape on her. It is further submitted that applicant, who has no criminal history, has been languishing in jail since 04.6.2026 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. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Anil Kumar Savita Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Amit Rajbhar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) 5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submits that victim is a minor girl aged about 13 years as per certificate of class IVth and she has stated in her statements recorded under sections 180 and 183 BNSS that applicant enticed her away and established physical relationship with her without her consent. 6. As per the FIR, applicant is said to have enticed away the daughter of the first informant aged about 13 years, however, she has been recovered. There appears to be material contradictions in the statements of the victim recorded under sections 180 and 183 BNSS as she has stated in her statement under section 180 BNSS that the applicant enticed her away and established physical relationship with her without her consent whereas in her statement under section 183 BNSS she has stated that she was in love with the applicant for the last five years and she left her home on earlier occasion and physical relationship was established between them. However, on the alleged date of occurrence, applicant took her to an agricultural field where he established physical relationship with her on her consent. Medico-legal report of the victim does not support the allegation of rape on her as no injury has been found on her private part. The victim has been found to be aged about 13 years as per certificate of class IVth, however, there is no certificate of High School or school first attended and no radiological examination has been conducted for determination of her age. Applicant, who has no criminal history, has been languishing in jail since 04.6.2026. 7. 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. 8. Let the applicant Amit Rajbhar 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 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. BAIL No. 30937 of 2026 2 (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. 9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. 10. 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 17, 2026 Madhurima BAIL No. 30937 of 2026 3 (Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) Digitally signed by :- MADHURIMA GARG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad