Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 160246 (ALL)

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

NABAIL/1105/2025 · 2025-08-27

Karunesh Singh Pawar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 482 BNSS No. - 1105 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. 1. The present anticipatory bail application has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.-296/2025, Under Section-137(2),64 BNS & 34 Pocso Act, Police Station-Biswan, District- Sitapur. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA for the State. 3. Notice to respondent no. 2 is dispensed with in view of the proposed order. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. It is stated that the victim had gone to Lucknow to meet one Nitin, and it is Nitin who is involved. The allegation of rape against the applicant is false, and he has been implicated only to save Nitin. 5. Learned AGA, however, has opposed the bail application, submitting that the victim’s statement under Section 180 BNSS finds corroboration from the mobile number used for procuring her Aadhaar Card, which was being operated by the applicant. The alleged sim was used by the applicant. Thus statement of the victim under Section 180 BNSS is dully corroborated by the scientific evidence. In her statement under Section 183 BNSS also, the victim has reiterated the allegation of rape against the applicant. It is therefore not a case of false implication. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Pradeep Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ehsan .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) 6. Upon due consideration of the statements of the victim under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, the corroborative material relating to the applicant’s mobile number, and the fact that the victim was 16 years, 5 months, and 7 days old at the time of the incident, I find that the allegations pertain to a heinous offence. It cannot be said to be a case of false implication. 7. Accordingly, the bail application is dismissed. August 27, 2025 R.C. NABAIL No. 1105 of 2025 2 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench