Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 183829 (ALL)

SONU SONKAR v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND 3 OTHERS

BAIL/10624/2025 · 2025-11-04

Pankaj Bhatia

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10624 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA for the State. Whereas, no one has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant despite notice. 2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in Case Crime/FIR No.414 of 2015, under Sections 341, 342, 323, 324, 307, 376(G), 419 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 4, 8, 12, 17, 18, 19 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station - G.R.P. Lucknow, District Lucknow. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in terms of the FIR it was alleged that around four days ago, victim/informant had fight with her father and she left for Lucknow Station and subsequently, she went with a girl on the terrace of the station where the applicant was called and he proposed to marry the victim and subsequently the applicant committed wrong with her. It was also stated that subsequently she was taken by force to the home of the applicant and sindoor was applied on her. It was also stated that wrong was committed with her. 4. In the light of the statement, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is in jail since 18.08.2015 and the victim is not even coming for examination. It is stated that through DLSA nine witnesses have been examined, however, in the absence of the victim Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Amar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sonu Sonkar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) coming for deposition, the trial is not being concluded, the applicant has no criminal antecedent. 4. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application. 5. Considering the pre-trial detention suffered by the applicant for more than ten years is ex-facie violative of Article 21 of Constitution of India and on that ground alone coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedent, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed. 6. Let the applicant- Sonu Sonkar be released on bail in aforesaid FIR/Case Crime Number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) each of the like amount 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 4, 2025 Mohit Singh/- BAIL No. 10624 of 2025 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- MOHIT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench