SHAILENDRA KUMAR @ GOLU v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. LKO.
BAIL/2883/2025 · 2025-04-05
Subhash Vidyarthi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 132048 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 132048 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:19067 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2883 of 2025 Applicant :- Shailendra Kumar @ Golu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Satyendra Kumar Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
1. Heard Shri Satyendra Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Ashok Srivastava, 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.456 of 2024, under Sections 323, 506, 452, 376(2)N I.P.C. registered at Police Station- Ramkot, District- Sitapur. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 03.12.2024 on the basis of an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C./ 175(3) B.N.S.S. given against the applicant, his brother Mahendra and brother-in-law Dinesh @ Guddu, stating that the applicant was engaged in business of milk alongwith the informant's husband. While the informant was alone at her house, the applicant entered her house at about 07:00 AM on 19.02.2024 and made physical relations with her against her wishes and prepared photo and video of the incident. He blackmailed her on the strength of photo and video and made physical relations with her repetitively on numerous occasions at numerous places and, thereafter, the applicant pressurized the informant to marry him. 4. Besides the statement made in the FIR, she further stated that the applicant had taken her to Delhi and had kept her in a room
and he had beaten her up and made physical relations with her there also. In response to some questions put by the Investigating Officer, the informant stated that the applicant is closely related to her husband. She further stated that she had gone out with the applicant on two occasions. One she had gone to Gurgaon for ten days and on the second occasion, she had gone to Delhi and stayed with the applicant for 26 days. 5. The informant declined to under go medico-legal examination. As per the radio-logical examination report, age of the informant is around 30 years. 6. In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history. 7.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application and on the basis of written instructions, he has submitted that allegations have been established during investigation and a charge-sheet has been submitted on16.01.2025. 8. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the incident took place on 19.02.2024, the application under Section 175(3) B.N.S.S. has been filed on 08.10.2024 and the FIR has been lodged thereafter; in the application under Section 175(3) B.N.S.S. or in the FIR the informant did not disclosed that the applicant is a relative of her husband; the informant herself declined to undergo medico-legal examination, allegations are not supported by findings of the medico-legal examination report and that the informant is a married woman aged 30 years; that as per the medico-legal examination report of the applicant, he is aged 22 years and he has no criminal history whereas the investigation already stands concluded yet the applicant is
languishing in jail since 12.01.2025, 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. 9. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed. 10. Let the applicant- Shailendra Kumar @ 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 :- 5.4.2025 -Amit K- Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench