Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 201593 (ALL)

AMAN VERMA v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND 4 OTHERS

/9704/2025 · 2025-10-14

Karunesh Singh Pawar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9704 of 2025 Court No. - 15 HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA for the State. None appears on behalf of the complainant, although, as per the instructions of learned AGA, notice to the complainant is served. In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the informant’s minor daughter, aged about sixteen years, was enticed away on 22.08.2025 at around 12:00 noon. Suspicion has been raised upon the applicant, Aman Verma, alleging that he enticed the victim away. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim, in her statement recorded under Section 180 BNSS, did not make any allegation against the applicant and, in fact, categorically denied his involvement. In that statement, she stated that she had left her home of her own free will. However, in her subsequent statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS, she made certain improvements and gave a contradictory version. As per the school records, the victim is 17 years, 2 months, and 2 days old. It is further submitted that no medico-legal examination of the victim has been conducted. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Vivek Chandra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Aman Verma .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 4 Others .....Opposite Party(s) aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant. Considering the contradictory and inconsistent statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, the absence of corroborative evidence, and the fact that the applicant is in custody since 05.09.2025 without any criminal antecedents, this Court finds it to be a fit case for granting bail to the applicant. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Aman Verma involved in Case Crime No. 319/2025, U/S- 137 (2) B.N.S. and S- 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station- Mahmudabad, District- Sitapur, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:- (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) 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. (iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him in accordance with law. (vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section BAIL No. 9704 of 2025 2 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A IPC (now Section 209 of BNS). It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial. October 14, 2025 R.C. BAIL No. 9704 of 2025 3 (Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.) Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench