Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 157508 (ALL)

MAJIDA BEGUM AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. HOME LKO. AND 3 OTHERS

/7556/2025 · 2025-08-13

Subhash Vidyarthi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:47576 Court No. - 13 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7556 of 2025 Applicant :- Majida Begum And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- R.B.S. Rathaur,Anurag Singh Rathaur Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Shri R.B.S. Rathore, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri Manish 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.41 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 352, 74 & 61 of B.N.S., Sections 7/8 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 and Sections 3/5(3) of The Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021, registered at Police Station- Delhupur, District- Pratapgarh. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 14.05.2025, stating that two daughters of the informant aged 13 and 17 years had gone missing and the informant also stated that, upon inquiring, it came to light that the applicants had taken one of the girls outside the village and another co-accused person had taken the other girl. 4. In the statement of both the victims recorded by the Investigating Officer under Section 180 BNSS, they stated that their mother had beaten them due to which they got angry and they had gone away from home. Both of them had categorically stated that no misdeed was committed against any of them and they had gone out of their home on their own free will. 5. The informant and the victims both declined the medico-legal examination of the victims. In the statement of the informant's elder daughter recorded under Section 183 BNSS, she stated that she was in relationship with the son of the applicant No.1 for the past four years and she had gone with him out of her own free will. 6. In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicants are innocent persons, they have been falsely implicated in the present case and they have no criminal history. 7. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application and has submitted that allegations have been established during the investigation and charge sheet has been submitted on 08.06.2025. 8. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that in the statements of the victims recorded under Section 180 BNSS wherein they have levelled no allegation against the applicants as well as the statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS, wherein the elder daughter of the informant has stated that she was in relationship with the son of the applicant No.1 for the past four years coupled with the fact that the applicants have no criminal history and they are languishing in jail since 17.05.2025 and the investigation already stands concluded, 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 applicants- Majida Begum and Sabreen 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 applicants shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; (ii) the applicants shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicants shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court. Order Date :- 13.8.2025 S. Shivhare Digitally signed by :- SHASHANK SHIVHARE High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench