VIMAL @ VIMAL KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND 3 OTHERS
BAIL/4208/2025 · 2025-05-16
Subhash Vidyarthi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 139928 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 139928 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:28843 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4208 of 2025 Applicant :- Vimal @ Vimal Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Mahendra Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
1. Heard Sri Mahendra Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arvind Kumar Pandey, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and Sri Rajesh Kumar, Advocate, who has put in appearance on behalf of the informant and filed his vakalatnama, which is taken on record. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 366 of 2024, under Sections 64, 87, 137(2) B.N.S. and Section 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered at Police Station Behta Mujawar, District Unnao. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 24.12.2024 stating that the informant's daughter aged about 17 years had gone away from home at about 1.00 p.m. on 22.12.2024. 4. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 BNSS she stated that her father had scolded her and, therefore, she had gone to the house of her bua (father's sister). Upon coming to know about lodging of F.I.R. by her father she came back. She categorically stated that no misdeed was committed against her. 5. The victim declined to undergo medico legal examination. 6. In her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS the victim stated that she had gone to attend the call of nature in a field at about 5.00 p.m. on 22.12.2024 and while returning the applicant made her sit in his vehicle, took her to Kanpur, kept her in a room and forcibly committed the misdeed. Thereafter, the medico legal examination of the victim was conducted, wherein no mark of any injury or use of force has been found on her body. The radiological examination of the victim was not conducted for ascertaining her age. After investigation the Investigating Officer has submitted a charge sheet on
19.01.2025. 7. In the affidavit filed in support of 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. 8.
The learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the State and the learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail and they have submitted that the victim is a minor and therefore the applicant is not entitled to be enlarged on bail. 9. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that in her initial statement the victim had merely stated that she had gone away from her home at about 1.00 p.m. on 22.12.2024 as her father had scolded her and she did not level allegation of any misdeed by any person; that initially the victim has declined to undergo medico legal examination and it was for the first time that while recording her statement under Section 183 BNSS on 03.01.2025 when the victim stated that the applicant had raped her but the allegation of commission of rape is not supported by the
findings of medico legal examination report; that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 09.01.2025 and the investigation already stands 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. 10. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed. 11. Let the applicant-Vimal @ Vimal Kumar 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, unless his appearance is exempted by the learned trial court. (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) Order Date :- 16.5.2025 Ram. Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench