Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 167267 (ALL)

ARVIND @ NAHAKKE v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. DEPTT. OF HOME LKO. AND 3 OTHERS

BAIL/11426/2024 · 2025-04-01

Subhash Vidyarthi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:18090 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11426 of 2024 Applicant :- Arvind @ Nahakke Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rajat Pratap Singh,Ajeet Kumar Singh,Smriti Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Alok Kumar Mishra Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Sri Ajeet Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arvind Kumar Paney, the learned AGA 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. 296/2024, under Sections 137(2)/87/65 B.N.S. & 3/4(2) POCSO Act, Police Station Atrauli, District Hardoi. 3.The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 11.07.2024 alleging that the applicant had enticed away the informant's sister aged 16 years. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S., she stated that she is aged 17 years, her brother used to consume liquor and abuse and beat her mother and being angry against it, she had gone to the house of her father's sister at Atrauli. Upon coming to know about the FIR, she returned of her own. No misdeed was committed against her. 4. In the medico legal examination report of the victim, no mark of injury or sign of use of force has been found. In the pathological examination report age of the victim has been opined to be 17 years. 5. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S., she alleged that the applicant had forcibly taken her away, her younger sister had come there hearing her cries but she had gone to call her mother, meanwhile the applicant took her to a jungle outside the village and raped her. 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. The State has filed a counter affidavit opposing the bail application. It has been stated in the counter affidavit that information of the present application has been delivered to the informant/ victim. A copy of the statement of the victim recorded during investigation, a copy of her medico legal examination report as well as a copy of the supplementary examination report have been annexed with the counter affidavit, as per which no spermatozoa has been found in pathological examination report of the vaginal smear of the victim. As per educational documents, date of birth of the victim is 15.09.2009. A charge sheet has already been submitted on 23.08.2024. 8. The opposite party no. 2 has put in appearance by engaging a counsel but no counter affidavit has been filed by the opposite party no. 2. 9. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that in the initial statement, the victim has stated that she had gone from her home out of her own free will and she has not levelled any allegation against any person; that the findings of medico legal examination report as well as supplementary examination report do not support the allegation of commission of rape, although this allegation has subsequently been levelled by the victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 Cr.P.C. and that the applicant is a young man having no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 17.02.2024 whereas 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. 10. Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed. 11. Let the applicant-Arvind @ Nahakke 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 :- 1.4.2025 Pradeep/- Digitally signed by :- PRADEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench