High Court · 2025

the applicant at about 06:00 PM on 14.03.2025. First, she took a taxi from Songaon and then she took a bus to Ambedkar Nagar from where she went to Mumbai with the applicant where they stayed in a rented room and married on 16.03.2025. Upon coming to know about the FIR, she came back with the applicant.

7. The victim was medically examined on 21.03.2025. She stated before the Doctor that she had gone with the applicant, she has married him and stayed with him. She categorically stated that she has not been raped. The chart which is mentioned in the format of medico-legal examination report for recording the details regarding the sexual violence clearly states that the victim did not say anything and she stated that nothing had been done against her. The internal medico-legal examination of the victim revealed no tear, no injury and no swelling. The Doctor has concluded that there were no sign of use of force or rape. However, the hymen was old ruptured.

8. The pathological examination report mentions that no spermatozoa (dead or alive) was found in the vaginal smear slide of the victim.

9. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S. on 24.03.2025, she stated that the applicant had forcibly taken her away to Delhi where she married him in a temple and forcibly made physical relations with her.

10. The learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application and he has submitted that information of the present application has been delivered to the informant through police and the investigation in the present case is still pending.

11. Learned A.G.A. has further submitted that the victim is merely 12 years of age, her hymen was found to be ruptured which indicates vaginal penetration. He has submitted that the applicant is liable to be punished under Section 4(2) of Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 which provides a sentence of minimum 20 years, which can extend up to imprisonment for life, which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of natural life of that person and he can also be held liable to pay fine.

12. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, from the material available on record, at this stage, prima facie it appears that although as per the education certificate, age of the victim is said to be 12 years, the informant has stated the victim's age to be 16 years in the FIR lodged by him. In the initial statement recorded by the Investigating Officer, the victim did not level any allegation against the applicant and she categorically stated that she had gone with the applicant out of her own free will. A similar statement was given by the victim before the Doctor during her medico-legal examination wherein she categorically stated that nothing had been committed against her and the chart given for mentioning details regarding sexual violence states that the victim did not give any details and she stated that nothing was done against her. In spite of it, the victim's internal medico- legal examination was conducted and the Doctor has found that there was no sign of use of force or rape, there was no bleeding, no tear, no injury and no swelling on the private parts of the victim. The pathological examination report findings also do not support the allegation of sexual violence. However, in her subsequent statement under Section 183 B.N.S.S., the victm has stated that the applicant had forcibly taken her away and married him and kept her with him.

13. Having considered the aforesaid facts coupled with the fact that the applicant is a young man aged 19 years having no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 20.03.2025, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid case.

14. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed.

15. Let the applicant- Sachin Kumar be released on bail in the aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court, unless his/her appearance exempted by the trial Court. . Order Date :- 14.5.2025 -Amit K- [Subhash Vidyarthi, J.] AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

the applicant at about 06:00 PM on 14.03.2025. First, she took a taxi from Songaon and then she took a bus to Ambedkar Nagar from where she went to Mumbai with the applicant where they stayed in a rented room and married on 16.03.2025. Upon coming to know about the FIR, she came back with the applicant.

7. The victim was medically examined on 21.03.2025. She stated before the Doctor that she had gone with the applicant, she has married him and stayed with him. She categorically stated that she has not been raped. The chart which is mentioned in the format of medico-legal examination report for recording the details regarding the sexual violence clearly states that the victim did not say anything and she stated that nothing had been done against her. The internal medico-legal examination of the victim revealed no tear, no injury and no swelling. The Doctor has concluded that there were no sign of use of force or rape. However, the hymen was old ruptured.

8. The pathological examination report mentions that no spermatozoa (dead or alive) was found in the vaginal smear slide of the victim.

9. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S. on 24.03.2025, she stated that the applicant had forcibly taken her away to Delhi where she married him in a temple and forcibly made physical relations with her.

10. The learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application and he has submitted that information of the present application has been delivered to the informant through police and the investigation in the present case is still pending.

11. Learned A.G.A. has further submitted that the victim is merely 12 years of age, her hymen was found to be ruptured which indicates vaginal penetration. He has submitted that the applicant is liable to be punished under Section 4(2) of Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 which provides a sentence of minimum 20 years, which can extend up to imprisonment for life, which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of natural life of that person and he can also be held liable to pay fine.

12. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, from the material available on record, at this stage, prima facie it appears that although as per the education certificate, age of the victim is said to be 12 years, the informant has stated the victim's age to be 16 years in the FIR lodged by him. In the initial statement recorded by the Investigating Officer, the victim did not level any allegation against the applicant and she categorically stated that she had gone with the applicant out of her own free will. A similar statement was given by the victim before the Doctor during her medico-legal examination wherein she categorically stated that nothing had been committed against her and the chart given for mentioning details regarding sexual violence states that the victim did not give any details and she stated that nothing was done against her. In spite of it, the victim's internal medico- legal examination was conducted and the Doctor has found that there was no sign of use of force or rape, there was no bleeding, no tear, no injury and no swelling on the private parts of the victim. The pathological examination report findings also do not support the allegation of sexual violence. However, in her subsequent statement under Section 183 B.N.S.S., the victm has stated that the applicant had forcibly taken her away and married him and kept her with him.

13. Having considered the aforesaid facts coupled with the fact that the applicant is a young man aged 19 years having no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 20.03.2025, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid case.

14. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed.

15. Let the applicant- Sachin Kumar be released on bail in the aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions:- (i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court, unless his/her appearance exempted by the trial Court. . Order Date :- 14.5.2025 -Amit K- [Subhash Vidyarthi, J.] AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench