Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 169136 (ALL)

VISHAL SAROJ v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. GOVT. OF U.P. LKO. AND 3 OTHERS

BAIL/12316/2024 · 2025-05-02

Subhash Vidyarthi

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:25517 Court No. - 15 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12316 of 2024 Applicant :- Vishal Saroj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Of U.P. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sumit Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anita Tiwari,Simi Jha Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Sri Sumit Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Nikita Mishra, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State, Ms. Sangita Singh, Advocate holding brief of Ms. Anita Tiwari, the learned counsel for the informant and perused the records. 2. The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 0263 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 87, 64 B.N.S. and Section 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered at Police Station Lalganj Nagar, District Pratapgarh. 3. The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 09.07.2024 against the applicant, his mother and uncle stating that the applicant had enticed away the informant's daughter on 08.07.2024 with the help of other co- accused persons. 4. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 BNSS she stated that she is aged about 19 years, she has married the applicant on 09.07.2024. She was residing in a room with the applicant as his wife and upon coming to know about lodging of F.I.R. she came back of her own to get her statement recorded. She stated that she does not want to go home. 5. The medico legal examination report of the victim mentions no mark of injury or sign of use of force and before the doctor also the victim stated that she has married the applicant. In the pathological examination report of the victim no spermatozoa were seen in vaginal smear slide. 6. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 BNSS she alleged that the applicant had forcibly taken her away and married her. After the marriage the applicant took her to Kanpur and she lived with him in a rented room for one month. After the F.I.R. was lodged the applicant himself dropped her to Pratapgarh. 7. In the affidavit filed in support of bail application it has been stated that the applicant is a young man aged 21 years, he is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history. 8. The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith the copies of relevant materials collected during investigation and a copy of charge sheet dated 09.09.2024. The informant has also filed a counter affidavit but no new fact has come to light in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the informant. 9. Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that in the statement of the victim recorded by the Investigating Officer as also in the narration of statement recorded by the doctor during her medico legal examination she has stated that she has gone with the applicant out of her own freewill and she has married him, although later she alleged that the applicant had forcibly taken her away and married her and took her to Kanpur and she lived with him as his wife in a rented room for one month, coupled with the fact that the applicant is a young man having no previous criminal history, he is languishing in jail since 07.08.2024 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-Vishal Saroj 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 :- 2.5.2025 Ram. Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench