Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 181196 (ALL)

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

/11442/2025 · 2025-11-28

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11442 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 Sri Vivek Chandra, who has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2. The Vakalatnama is taken on record. 2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.299 of 2025, under Sections 65(2), 352, 351(3) of BNS and Section 5(m)/ 6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Mohammadpur, District Barabanki. 3. In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that the daughter of the informant aged about 6 years had gone for marriage ceremony when the applicant enticed her and took her in a jungle and inserted finger in her private part. A similar statement was given under Sections 180 and 183 of BNSS, Although no allegation of penetrative sexual assault was made under Section 183 of BNSS,the applicant is being challaned for the offence under Section 5M/ 6 of POCSO Act. 4. The Counsel for the applicant argues that on the basis of the medical on record, no material exists to corroborate, the penetrative sexual assault as defined under Section 3/5 of POCSO Act. The hymen was found to be intact. 5. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the bail prayer. 6. The Counsel for the complainant also opposes the bail prayer by Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Krishna Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Saurabh Patel .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) arguing that in terms of the statement of the witnesses, the applicant was intended to do wrong on the victim. 7. Considering the medical on record, prima facie, the offence under Section 5M/6 of POCSO Act is not corroborated and Section 7/8 of POCSO Act is punishable for a term of 5 years and the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is languishing in jail since 25.05.2025, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 8. Let the applicant Saurabh Patel 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. 11442 of 2025 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench