JAYPRAKASH KANNAUJIA v. STATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS
BAIL/19064/2025 · 2025-07-06
Samit Gopal
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 64523 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 64523 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:105980 Court No. - 64 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19064 of 2025 Applicant :- Jayprakash Kannaujia Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Abhay Pratap Singh,Shiwendra Pratap Shahi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manoj Kumar Maurya Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
1. List revised. 2. Heard Sri Abhay Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Manoj Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the first informant, Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record. 3. This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Jayprakash Kannaujia, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 128 of 2025, under Sections 61(2), 70(2), 125 B.N.S. and Section 5(G)/6 Protection of Children From Sexual Offences, registered at P.S.- Tarkulwa, District- Deoria. 4. The F.I.R. of the matter was lodged on 10.4.2025 by Smt. Reeta Devi against the applicant and Ravi Kanaujia with the allegation that she along with her two daughter and one son lives in the house. Her daughter aged about 12 years has been allured and enticed away by Ravi Kanaujia her neighbour on 08.4.2025 at about 04:00 p.m. She has been searched a lot but could not be traced. Jaiprakash Kanaujia the father of boy helped her daughter to drive away. A report be lodged and action be taken. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the victim in statement recorded during investigation under Section 180 B.N.S.S. states that she is aged about 17 years and is studying in class-10. She further states that on 08.4.2025 she became angry with her mother and went to crossing in the village from where she went to Deoria and Gorakhpur after which she went to Deoria Railway Station. It is submitted that subsequently in the statement
recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S. she states of the applicant and Indrajeet taking her away to Delhi. She came to know that her mother ill after which she tried a phone call on which the applicant snatched phone and broke the SIM and then on 14.4.2025 they took her to Deoria. She further states that Indrajeet and Ravi Kanaujia committed rape upon her.
She further states that said three persons had taken her away with them. It is submitted that the same is an improvement and under pressure of the family members and on their tutoring. It is argued that the applicant has no other criminal antecedents as stated in para-19 of the affidavit and is in jail since 17.4.2025. 6. Per contra, learned State counsel and learned counsel for the first informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that as per school records, date of birth of the victim is 20.10.2012 and as such she is aged about 12 years at the time of incident. It is submitted that the applicant is named in the F.I.R. and also in the statement of victim recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S. and has been given specific and active role of participation in the matter. It is submitted that the victim has stated of 02 accused namely Indrajeet and Ravi Kanaujia committing rape upon her which is a gang rape. It is prayed that the prayer for bail be rejected. 7. After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the record, it is evident that the victim is aged about 12 years as per school records and is minor. The applicant is named in the F.I.R. and is alleged to have helped the co-accused Ravi Kanaujia in enticing her away. Subsequently the victim in her statement recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S. gives role of kidnapping to the applicant and two others and also the specific role of snatching away her phone and breaking the SIM when she tried to make a call from it has been given to the applicant. The two said co- accused are alleged to have gang raped her. 8. Looking to fact and circumstances of the case, nature of evidence and gravity of offence, I do not find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. 9. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected.
(Samit Gopal,J.) Order Date :- 7.7.2025 Naresh Digitally signed by :- NARESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad