SOORAJ GUPTA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. DEPTT. HOME LKO. AND 3 OTHERS
BAIL/9587/2025 · 2025-10-08
Pankaj Bhatia
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 199988 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 199988 (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. - 9587 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J.
1. Heard Sri Durgesh Kumar Shukla the counsel who appears to be as a legal aid for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record. 2. The accused-applicant seeks bail in FIR/Case Crime No.342 of 2024 under sections 333, 76, 351(2), 64(1) BNS and 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Gangaghat, District Unnao. 3. The FIR in question was lodged alleging that on 29.07.2024 at about 1:00 pm when the informant was at Kanpur, the daughter of the informant aged about 13 years was alone at home and the applicant entered into the home and removed the cloth of the daughter and as the son of the landlord open the door by use of force, the applicant ran way. 4. From the case diary, as produced by the leaned AGA, the statement under section 180 BNSS is evident, wherein the victim stated that the applicant had removed her lagging and tried to commit wrong on her and also threatened her, no allegation of rape were levelled in the said statement. The medical examination of the victim was done on 30.07.2024, which did not indicate any presence of injury. Subsequently in the statement under section 183 BNSS recorded on 29.07.2024, the allegation of sexual rape were levelled against the applicant. 5. It is argued that the medical in question does not support the allegation and there is no definite document to form exact opinion with regard to Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Durgesh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Sooraj Gupta .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s)
exact age of the victim at this stage. 6. Considering the medical not supporting the allegations levelled for the first time and there being huge variance in the two statements under section 180 and 183 BNSS, prima-facie, a case for bail is made out more so when the applicant has no criminal history and is in custody since
13.09.2024. Thus the bail application is allowed. 5.
Let the applicant Sooraj Gupta be released on bail in aforesaid FIR/Case Crime Number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount 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. While fixing the sureties, the trial court shall take into consideration the fact that the applicant has no relatives and may not be able to furnish the surety. The said aspect shall be taken into consideration by the trial court. October 8, 2025 VNP/- BAIL No. 9587 of 2025 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- VISHVANATH PRASAD SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench