MOHD. AZEEM v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO. AND 3 OTHERS
BAIL/9271/2025 · 2025-12-04
Pankaj Bhatia
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 182999 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 182999 (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. - 9271 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State, Ram Prakash Singh, learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.
2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.213 of 2025, under sections 64(2)(M), 351(3), 352 BNS, Sections 3/4 POCSO Act, Sections 3(2)V SC/ST Act, P.S. Kakori, District Lucknow.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant argues that the FIR in question was lodged under Section 3/4 POCSO Act. Subsequently after investigation chargesheet has been filed in which besides other offence the applicant is proposed to be prosecuted under Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
4. As the bail was rejected under Section ¾ POCSO Act and no order has been passed by the trial court in respect of the chargesheet, the instant bail application is permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to approach this Court again after the bail application is decided in the sections added against the applicant on the basis of chargesheet.
5. The bail application is dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty. December 4, 2025/J. K. Dinkar Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Prabhaat Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Ram Prakash Singh, Ashutosh Singh Chauhan, Sumit Kumar Kureel (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Mohd. Azeem .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) Digitally signed by :- JESHU KUMAR DINKAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench