RAJ KUMAR MISHRA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME CIVIL SECRETT. U.P. LKO. AND 3 OTHERS
BAIL/9883/2023 · 2025-10-31
Pankaj Bhatia
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 185092 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 185092 (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. - 9883 of 2023
Court No. - 12 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State; Shri Awadhesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record. 2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.319 of 2021, under Section 363, 366, 376AB, 323, 504, 506 IPC & Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, P.S. Wazirganj, District Lucknow. 3. In terms of the FIR, a missing person report was lodged alleging that daughter of the informant aged about 11 years was enticed on the false pretext of getting some benefits of government schemes and subsequently, she was missing. Upon recovery, medical of the victim was done which did not indicate any injury marks on the body either in the internal or the external parts. 4. In the light of the said allegation, submission of learned counsel for the application is that the applicant is in custody since 28.10.2021 and has suffered pre-trial detention of almost four years. 5. Trial court report indicates that charge was framed on 17.08.2024. It further records that the statement of four witnesses has already been recorded including statement of the victim as well as doctor who also Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Raj Priya Srivastava, Amit Kumar Srivastava, Anil Kumar Yadav, Arvind Kumar Tripathi, Manoj Kumar, Sarvesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Awadhesh Kumar Mishra Raj Kumar Mishra .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. U.P. Lko. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s)
stated that no injury was found on the victim. 6. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application. 7. Without going into the merits of the allegation against the applicant, considering that rights of the applicant guaranteed under Art. 21 of Constitution for speedy justice has been violated as he has suffered pre-trial detention of more than four years coupled with the fact that four fact witnesses have already been examined and there is nothing on record to demonstrate that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, can adversely affect the trial, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed. 8.
Let the applicant Raj Kumar Mishra be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of 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. October 31, 2025 nishant BAIL No. 9883 of 2023 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- NISHANT MOHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench