Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 116453 (ALL)

PANKAJ KUMAR @ PANKAJ LAL CHAUHAN v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO. AND ANOTHER

CRLA/132/2025 · 2025-02-14

Subhash Chandra Sharma

Criminal Appealbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:9885 Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 132 of 2025 Appellant :- Pankaj Kumar @ Pankaj Lal Chauhan Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Rajiva Dubey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Narendra Singh,Sarfraz Ahmad Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J. This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act has been preferred by the appellant with the prayer to set aside the bail rejection order dated 21.12.2024 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, District Lakhimpur Kheri. Heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that in this case the appellant is innocent and has committed no offence but the F.I.R was lodged against him by the father of the victim who was aged about 15 years. It is further submitted that he never enticed away the girl. The statement of the victim under section 183 B.N.S.S was recorded before the learned Magistrate in which she stated clearly that she was taken away by Prahlad and Premsagar and left in the way and found herself in the Mumbai Railway Station, then she made contact with her relative to whom she narrated the incident and he informed to her house and brought her to her home.He did not commit any rape with her. The statement of victim shows that there was no involvement of the present appellant in the incident. He is in jail since 30.11.2024. The Court below while passing the impugned order did not take into account the facts and evidence available on record in right perspective and erred in passing the same. It is lastly submitted that the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant suffers from infirmity and illegality warranting interference by this Court. Learned AGA opposed the prayer as aforesaid. I have considered the rival submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for complainant as well as learned A.G.A and have gone through the entire record including the impugned order carefully. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, this Court is of the opinion that the appellant has made out a case for bail. The Court below erred in rejecting the bail application. The impugned order suffers from infirmity and illegality and the same is liable to be set-aside and the appeal is to be allowed. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the impugned order rejecting the bail application of the appellant is set-aside. Let the appellant- Pankaj Kumar @ Pankaj Lal Chauhan, involved in Case Crime No. 282 of 2024, under Sections 137(2),87 BNS and 3(2)5/4 SC/ST Act, P.S. Padhuwa, District Lakhimpur Kheri be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. 1. The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. 2. The appellant will not pressurise/ intimidate the prosecution witness. 3. The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. 4. The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected. 5. The appellant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 14.2.2025 GS Digitally signed by :- GHAN SHYAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench