Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 52954 (ALL)

SUMIT SAINI v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

BAIL/14981/2025 · 2025-05-21

Krishan Pahal

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:86424 Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14981 of 2025 Applicant :- Sumit Saini Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Pooja Singh,Rajesh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manoj Kumar Srivastava Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Sri Rajesh Yadav and Ms. Pooja Singh, learned counsels for the applicant and Sri Sandeep Kumar Rai, learned Advocate holding brief for Sri Manoj Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Pranshu Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 184 of 2025, U/S 137(2), 65(1) B.N.S. and 4(2) POCSO Act, Police Station Majhola, District Moradabad, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant in collusion with the other co-accused persons Neha Saini and Kishanlal Saini is stated to have enticed away minor daughter of the informant on 11.3.2025. 5. Learned counsels for the applicant have 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. There is no time of offence mentioned in the FIR, which itself is delayed by about one day and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. 6. Learned counsels have further argued that the victim by her looks, seems to be major, although, she is 16 years old as per her own statement. she has further stated that she had gone to Haridwar, although she was forced to go with the applicant as he carried her photographs with him. The said fact of carrying the photo of the victim by the applicant is false, as there is no recovery of any photograph from the applicant, whatsoever. 7. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 27.3.2025. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 8. Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail application but has not disputed the fact that there is no criminal history of the applicant and the aforesaid submissions of learned counsels for the applicant. 9. 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, there being no medical corroboration of the incident and there being no recovery of any photograph of the victim from the possession of the applicant, 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. 10. Let the applicant- Sumit Saini 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. 11. 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. 12. 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 :- 22.5.2025 Shalini (Justice Krishan Pahal) Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad