TABREZ v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME CIVIL SECTT. LKO AND 3 OTHERS
/6692/2025 · 2025-11-28
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 177508 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 177508 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6692 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record. Despite service of notice, no one appeared on behalf of the complainant. 2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.238 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1), 351(2) of BNS and Section 5L/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Phoolbehad, District Kheri. 3. In terms of the FIR allegations were levelled that on 06.04.2025 at about 4:00 AM (morning), the daughter of the informant aged about 15 years was gone out of home and did not return back. It was revealed that the daughter of the informant was enticed by the applicant. In the statement under Section 180 of BNSS, the victim stated that on 06.04.2025 at about 4:00 in the morning, she was taken by the applicant to his home and wrong was committed. A similar statement was given under Section 183 of BNSS. In the statement under Section 180, she stated that the incident was taken place on 04.04.2025. The medical on record does not corroborate the allegation. The tentative age of the victim is around 15 years. There is no definite document with regard to the exact age of the victim. 4. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the bail prayer. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sumit Chauhan, Manish Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Dharm Trivedi, Manish Kumar Pathak Tabrez .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s)
5. Considering the variance in two statements of the victim; the delay in lodging the FIR; the medical report not corroborating the allegations and the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is languishing in jail since 06.05.2024, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 6.
Let the applicant Tabrez be released on bail in the aforesaid first information report on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions: (a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings; (b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and (c) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. November 28, 2025 akverma BAIL No. 6692 of 2025 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench