Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 198923 (ALL)

ARJUN KUMAR v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND 3 OTHERS

BAIL/866/2025 · 2025-11-10

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. - 866 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.489 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 351(2), 70(2), 118(1), 110, 3(5) of BNS and Section 5(g)/ 6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Safdarganj, District Barabanki. 3. In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that the accused, who are the neighbours of the informant, had attempted to commit rape on the daughter of the informant, who is aged about 16 years. It was also alleged that the informant tried to lodge report against them but nothing was done and on 20.10.2024, when the daughter of the informant had gone to the agricultural field, the applicant threatened her and misbehaved with her and somehow she could escape. No allegation of rape was levelled. Subsequently, in the statement under Section 183 of BNSS, the allegation of insertion of finger in the private part was levelled. 4. In the light of the said allegations, it is argued by the Counsel for the applicant that the victim is the niece of the applicant and on account of her family dispute, the FIR in question has been lodged. 5. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the bail prayer. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Desh Deepak Verma Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Aakash Srivastava, Rinku Verma Arjun Kumar .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) 6. Considering the fact that no allegation of rape was levelled in the FIR and subsequently, the version was changed; the medical on record does not corroborate the allegation; the applicant is in custody since 05.11.2024 and has no criminal antecedents, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. 7. Let the applicant Arjun Kumar 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 10, 2025 akverma BAIL No. 866 of 2025 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench