Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 40371 (ALL)

SACHIN VISHWAKARMA v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

BAIL/12262/2025 · 2025-05-18

Gautam Chowdhary

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:83694 Court No. - 86 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12262 of 2025 Applicant :- Sachin Vishwakarma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Singh,Shaurya Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- Bhawna Verma,Deepak Dubey,G.A.,Umesh Kumar Singh Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J. 1. Heard Sri Amarendra Nath Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Ajay Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Deepak Verma and Ms. Bhawna Verma, learned counsel for the informant, Sri Chandan Singh the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire material available on record. 2. The applicant-Sachin Vishwakarma, has filed the instant bail application with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Crime No. 253 of 2024, under Sections 351(3) B.N.S., and Section 5G/6 POSCO Act, Police Station Khetasaray, District Jaunpur, during the pendency of the trial. 3. The prosecution story in brief is that on 04.12.2024 at about 07:00 P.M. the informant's grandson aged about nine year had gone to attend a programme at Panchayat Bhawan, in the meantime, the applicant took him to bathroom and had wrong with him, who came back crying and told the entire incident. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the incident is alleged to occurred at about 19:00 Hours on 04.12.2024 whereas the F.I.R. has been lodged on 05.12.2024 without there being any plausible explanation of such an inordinate delay. Learned counsel has drawn attention of this Court to the injury report, copy of which is at page no. 25 of the paper book and argued that no external injury seen at the time of examination. He further submits that there is a contradiction in the statements of the victim recorded under Section 180 and 183 of B.N.S.S. Learned counsel next argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to village party bandi. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 06.12.2024. It is thus contended that the applicant is entitled for bail. 5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as Sri Deepak Dubey learned counsel for the informant have contended that there is specific allegation against the applicant. Learned counsel has drawn attention of this Court to the injury report, copy of which is at page no. 35 of the paper and argued that though there is no mark of external injury but there is a multiple linear abrasion and redness over anal verge present which itself shows that offence has been committed by the applicant and therefore, the applicant is not entitled for bail. Learned counsel next argued that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. 6. Perusal of the injury report shows that injury sustained by the victim and that the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 B.N.S.S. has supported the prosecution version, though there is minor contradiction but at the same time, it should kept in mind that the victim is aged about nine years. 7. Keeping in view submissions of learned counsel for the parties, gravity of offence, nature of allegations and all the attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I do not find any good reason to exercise my discretion in favour of the accused-applicant. 8. Accordingly, the bail application stands rejected. Order Date :- 19.5.2025 S.Ali Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad