Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 125549 (ALL)

GOLU v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. HOME DEPTT. GOVT. LKO. AND 3 OTHERS

BAIL/1756/2025 · 2025-05-07

Subhash Vidyarthi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:26818 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1756 of 2025 Applicant :- Golu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Prabhu Ranjan Tripathi,Mrs. Sanju Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Abhinav Anand Verma,Jayant Pratap Singh,Tribhuwan Agnihotri Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Shri Prabhu Ranjan Tripathi, the learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Rajiv Kumar Verma, learned A.G.A.-I for the State and perused the records. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail of the applicant in Case Crime No.232 of 2024 under Sections 137(2), 352, 351(3), 70(2) of B.N.S. & 5/6 of P.O.C.S.O. Act registered at Police Station- Sammanpur, District- Ambedkar Nagar. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 08.11.2024 against four persons, including the applicant, stating that the applicant had taken away the informant's 13 years old daughter at about 05:30 PM on 03.11.2024 on the pretext of dropping her to her home on his motorcycle but on the way he molested her. When the informant telephonically enquired about the incident from the applicant, he came to the informant's house alongwith the other co- accused persons and abused and threatened them. 4. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S., she reiterated the F.I.R. version. 5. The victim declined to undergo internal medico-legal examination and the external examination revealed no mark of injury or sign of use of force. As per radio-logical examination report, age of the victim is about 14-15 years. 6. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S., she stated that the applicant and Ramesh Yadav had forcibly taken her on a motorcycle to some room at Tanda and both of them had raped her. Thereafter, the other co-accused persons came and they also raped her. 7. In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is a young man aged 20 years, he is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has not criminal history. 8. The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith material collected during investigation and a charge-sheet has been submitted on 30.12.2024. 9. A rejoinder affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant and the same is taken on record. 10. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that a co- accused Ramesh Yadav has been granted bail by means of an order dated 09.04.2025 passed in Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application u/S 482 BNSS No.306 of 2025. 11. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the incident took place on 03.11.2024 and the FIR has been lodged on 08.11.2024 and yet it does not make any mention of commission of rape by the applicant; the allegation of commission of rape is not there even in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. and it has been levelled for the first time in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S.; that the allegation is not supported by the findings of the medico-legal examination report and that the applicant has no criminal history, he is languishing in jail since 23.11.2024 whereas the investigation already stands concluded and a co- accused has already been granted anticipatory bail, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid crime. 12. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application stands allowed. 13. Let the applicant- Golu be released on bail in the aforementioned 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 :- 7.5.2025 -Amit K- Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench