Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 111778 (ALL)

UDAY SINGH GURJAR v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

BAIL/46041/2024 · 2025-01-27

Sameer Jain

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:13902 Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46041 of 2024 Applicant :- Uday Singh Gurjar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shamsher Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned AGA for the State apprised the Court that notice has been served upon the informant on 13.11.2024. Despite service of notice, none present on behalf of the informant. 2. Heard Sri Shamsher Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pradeep Kumar, learned AGA for the State. 3. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 280 of 2023, under Sections 377 IPC and Section 5M/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Binauli, District Baghpat during pendency of the trial. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that this is second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and his first bail application was dismissed by this Court on merit vide order dated 04.04.2024 and he is pressing the instant second bail application on the ground that however applicant is facing trial under Section 377 IPC and 5M/6 POCSO Act but in the present matter he is in jail since 15.11.2023 i.e. for last more than a year. 5. He further submits, victim of the case has already been examined before the trial court, therefore, there is no chance of tampering with the prosecution evidence. He further submits, from the statement of the victim it reflects, during cross-examination he did not support the prosecution case. 6. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history. 7. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that this is second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and victim of the case was six years old boy but could not dispute the other argument on facts advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. 8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case. 9. However, this is second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and first bail application of the applicant has been dismissed by this Court after considering the fact that victim was hardly six years old boy but it reflects that in the present matter applicant is in jail since 15.11.2023 i.e. for last more than a year and till date trial of the case could not be concluded. 10. Record further suggests that victim of the case has already been examined by the trial court and considering this fact, the submission advanced by learned counsel for the applicant that if applicant will be enlarged on bail then there is no chance of tampering with the prosecution evidence, cannot be ruled out. Record also suggests that during cross-examination victim did not support the prosecution case. 11. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history. 12. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail. 13. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed. 14. Let the applicant - Uday Singh Gurjar be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted. (ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity. 15. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant. 16. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 27.1.2025 AK Pandey Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad