JUDGMENT : Shree Prakash Singh, J. 1.Sri Aditya Kumar Bajpai, Advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing Vakalatnama on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 and the same is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Aditya Kumar Bajpai, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 292 of 2024, under sections 137(2), 87, 64(2) of the B.N.S. and section 5 (l)/6 of the POCSO Act, Police Station-Raniganj, District-Pratapgarh. 4. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the instant matter due to ulterior motive. He added that the applicant was more than 17 years of age at the time of the incident and he never enticed away the alleged victim as is evident from the statement of the victim recorded under section 183 of the B.N.S.S. as well as the statement given before the trial court. He next added that the victim herself went away with the applicant and she intended to perform marriage with the applicant. He submits that the whole story of the prosecution is demolished after the statement of the victim recorded by the trial court and the matter will not lead to the punishment. He next submits that the applicant is implicated due to animosity of the family members of the alleged victim and no such offence is committed and even ingredients of the offence charged, do not attract in the present matter. He further submits that there is a case criminal history, as is mentioned by the learned counsel for the State and that too, is of minor offence and applicant is languishing in jail since 20-09-2024 and he undertakes that in case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of the same and would cooperate in the trial proceedings. Further submitted that the chargesheet has been filed,as such, there is no possibility that the applicant would tamper the evidences or would threaten the witnesses and thus, submission is that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 5. Further submitted that the chargesheet has been filed,as such, there is no possibility that the applicant would tamper the evidences or would threaten the witnesses and thus, submission is that the applicant may be enlarged on bail. 5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the complainant has supported the version of the learned counsel for the applicant and submits that victim herself went away with the applicant and as such, no offence is committed. 6. Learned AGA appearing for the State though, has opposed the contentions on merits and submitted that the applicant was minor at the time of the alleged incident and the consent has no meaning at all. He also submits that the applicant has one case criminal history and therefore, he is not entitled for any relief. 7. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the material placed on record, it transpires that the statement of the alleged victim before the trial court demolished the story of the prosecution as she did not support the version of the prosecution. Further, the victim also stated that she intended to perform the marriage with the applicant and it seems that the family members, who were annoyed, have lodged the first information report. 8. This court has also noticed the fact that there is a case criminal history of the applicant and he is languishing in jail since 20-09-2024 and the chargesheet has been filed and further, there seems to be no possibility of conclusion of the trial in near future. 9. Considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and considering larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case of bail. 10. Let the applicant- Deepak Dubey involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:- (1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial. (2) 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. He shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (3) 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. (4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. 11. The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison. 12. It is clarified that the observations made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the merits of the case.