Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 52336 (ALL)

PINTU v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

BAIL/14652/2025 · 2025-05-16

Krishan Pahal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:82544 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14652 of 2025 Applicant :- Pintu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Juned Alam Counsel for Opposite Party :- Akhilesh K. Dwivedi,G.A. Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Janardan Yadav, learned Advocate holding brief for Sri Juned Alam, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Akhilesh K. Dwivedi, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Amit Kumar, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 247 of 2024, U/S 137(2), 87, 64 B.N.S. and 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Severahi, District Kushinagar, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to be a relative of the victim and is stated to have enticed her away on 4.7.2024 at about 10.00 pm. The FIR was instituted at police station by the informant. Subsequently, on 7.7.2024, the applicant and co- accused person Anita is stated to have threatened the victim that his daughter shall be put to prostitution. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. It is stated that he has nothing to do with the said offence. 6. The FIR is delayed by four days from the second incident and by seven days from the first incident and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. There is no FIR instituted regarding the first incident. 7. Learned counsel has further argued that the victim seems to be the consenting party, as is evident from her statement recorded u/s 183 B.N.S.S. She is living in the house of the applicant only and was pregnant at the time of her recovery in January, 2025. The family of the applicant is taking care of her. 8. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 26.1.2025. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 9. Learned State Law Officer and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application but have not disputed the fact that there is no criminal history of the applicant and the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the applicant. 10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, the delay in institution of FIR and the statement of the victim recorded u/s 183 B.N.S.S., without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 11. Let the applicant- Pintu involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. (i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence. (ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. 13. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 17.5.2025 Shalini (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad