Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 118657 (ALL)

DHARMENDRA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND 3 OTHERS

BAIL/728/2025 · 2025-03-26

Subhash Vidyarthi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:17282 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 728 of 2025 Applicant :- Dharmendra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shashank Shukla,Prachi Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Sri Shashank Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri Arvind Kumar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 549 of 2024, under Sections 351(2), 70(2), 64(2)(5), 115(2) of BNS and Section 5(g)/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered at Police Station- Krishna Nagar, District- Lucknow. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 23.11.2024 against the applicant and Chhoti alias Aakash alleging that the informant family members run an eatery. The applicant delivers vegetables at that eatery. The applicant and the co-accused person had called the victim on the pretext of delivering food and they made her drink, some cold drink laced with some intoxicating substance and thereafter they raped her. They threatened the informant that they had prepared an obscene video and by threatening to spread the video virally, they repeatedly called her and made physical relations with her. In the statement of the informant recorded u/s 180 B.N.S.S., she reiterated the F.I.R. version and in response to a specific question, she stated that she has not seen any such video. In the statement of the informant recorded u/s 183 B.N.S.S. also, she reiterated the F.I.R. version and she further stated that after a complaint was made with the police, some family members of the co-accused persons had threatened her mother. Some persons had damaged the eatery. She alleged that the accused persons forcibly administered her intoxicating substance and gave her intoxicating drugs for being administered to family members. In the medico legal examination report, no mark of injury or sign of use of force has been reported. 4. A copy of the relevant extract of the case diary has been annexed with the bail application, which shows that mobile phone of the applicant was recovered by the Investigating Officer. 5. In the affidavit filed in support of bail application it has been stated that the applicant is a young man aged 20 years, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history. 6. The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith copies of material collected during investigation as well as a copy of the charge-sheet submitted on 18.12.2024. It has been stated in the counter affidavit that information of the present bail application has been delivered to the informant. In the statement of the informant's brother, he categorically stated that the allegation of causing damage to the eatery is false. 7. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that besides the statement of the victim and her family members, there is no other material to support the allegation; the allegation of preparation of obscene video is not supported by any material: that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 24.11.2024 whereas the investigation already stand concluded and without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, 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 crime. 8. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed. 9. Let the applicant- Dharmendra 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 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. (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) Order Date :- 26.3.2025 Gurpreet Singh Digitally signed by :- GURPREET SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench