HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27430 of 2026 Court No. - 64 HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri N.K. Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Manoj Kumar Mishra, counsel for the informant. Perused the record. 2. The present bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 225 of 2026, under Sections 137(2), 65(1) B.N.S., and 3/4(2) POCSO Act, Police Station- Mandi, District- Saharanpur during pendency of the trial. 3. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The incident is alleged to have occurred on 11.5.2026, whereas the first information report was lodged on 14.5.2026. The delay in lodging the first information report is fatal to the prosecution case. The victim is a major. The age of the victim was incorrectly got registered in the school records by the victim's parents to give her advantage in life. There is no lawful basis for the age related entry of the victim in the school records. As per the report of Chief Medical Officer, Saharanpur dated 22.5.2026 the victim was found aged 19 years. Further, t he victim in her statements under Sections 180 and 183 B.N.S.S. stated that she left her house voluntarily and had gone to the applicant's place and established relations with him. There is no allegation of any forceful assault against the applicant. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 19 of the bail application. The applicant is in jail since 24.5.2026. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Avinash Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Manoj Kumar Mishra Sahib .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) 5. Learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. 6. Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that the first information report has been lodged belatedly. As per the report of Chief Medical Officer, Saharanpur dated 22.5.2026, the victim was found aged 19 years. The victim in her statements under Sections 180 and 183 B.N.S.S. stated that she left her house voluntarily and had gone to the applicant's place and established relations with him. There is no allegation of any forceful assault against the applicant. Further, the applicant has presently remained confined for more than three months and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 7. Let the applicant, Sahib involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that: i. the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court. 8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. September 16, 2026 S.S. BAIL No. 27430 of 2026 2 (Vivek Varma,J.) Digitally signed by :- SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad