JUDGMENT Raghvendra Kumar, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the false allegations have been leveled against the applicant. From the allegations made against the applicant, no case for the offence under section 354 I.P.C. is made out. From perusal of the statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C., the applicant alleged to have tried to drag the prosecutrix. The applicant and the prosecutrix both are in the Sales wing of different company. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. Therefore, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 3. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the bail application and submitted that the prosecutrix at the time of incident was major. The applicant has ruined the moral and character of the prosecutrix at a public place. Therefore, the bail application of the applicant is liable to be rejected. 4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and rival submissions of both sides, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find that it is a fit case for bail. 5. Let the applicant, Brajesh Dwivedi (Brajesh Kumar Dwivedi), who is involved in case crime No. 88 of 2015, under section 354, 354D, 352, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 7, 8, 11, 12 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. P.S.Haidergarh, District Barabanki be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions: (i) 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 court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) 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 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.