Allowed

Akash Kumar Jatav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC18 Aug 2025BAIL/10908/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under POCSO, BNS and SC/ST Act provisions for alleged gang rape of a minor. Court noted DNA sample of the newborn did not match the applicant or co-accused, victim's improved statements, refusal of medical examination and no criminal history, and granted bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the trial court, subject to conditions including no tampering with evidence and attendance at trial.

Akash Kumar Jatav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:48245

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10908 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Akash Kumar Jatav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home U.P. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Yaduvansh Mani Singh,Dinesh Kumar Tiwari,Ravi Kant Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pradeep Kumar Shukla

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pradeep Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.185 of 2024, under Sections 70(2), 75, 115(2), 351(2), 352 BNS, Sections 5/6 of the POCSO Act and Sections 3(1)W, 3(2)V of SC/ST Act, P.S. Bazar Shukul, District Amethi.

¶8

In the prosecution case it is alleged that minor daughter of the informant aged about 16 years on 06.07.2024 at about 07:00 am while she went to ease out in the orchard of Maniharan where founding her alone, the co-accused Junaid tried to rape her however, failed then he has brutally beaten the victim with belt and further threatened her to kill.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that while giving statement under Section 180 BNSS, prosecution story has been changed by the victim and allegation of gang rape has been levelled on four accused persons including the applicant however, no date, time or year has been mentioned regarding the allegation of gang rape however, it is alleged that on

¶10

06.07.2024, the co-accused Junaid attempted her to rape and incident has been witnessed by Reena, the aunt of the victim. While giving statement under Section 183 BNSS victim has again reiterated the same thing. He submits that there is lack of corroborative evidence as the victim has refused to undergo medical examination. In the ossification test, she has been found to be 18 years old. Applicant has no criminal history however, he is languishing in jail since 12.07.2024. He submits that victim was found pregnant however, in the DNA sample of the newly born baby, the sample has not matched with the applicant or any of the co-accused. The charge-sheet in the case has been filed. Specific role of beating the victim with belt has been levelld on the co-accused Junaid however, no injury has been found on the person of the victim.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail prayer however, he does not dispute the fact that DNA sample has not matched with the applicant or any of the co-accused.

¶12

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 12.07.2024 having no criminal history, improvement made by the victim in the prosecution case, refusal by the victim to undergo medical examination, radio-logical examination of the victim is 18 years, applicant has no criminal history and the fact that DNA sample of the newly born baby has not matched with the present applicant, charge-sheet in the case has been filed, no injury has been found on the person of the victim and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶13

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶14

Let the applicant Akash Kumar Jatav be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:

¶15

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶16

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

(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 under Section 229-A of the Indian Panel Code (now Section 269 of BNS).

¶20

(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 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

¶21

against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Panel Code (now Section 209 BNS).

¶22

Order Date :- 18.8.2025 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Akash Kumar Jatav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akash Kumar Jatav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ritesh Mittal and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Shiva Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and 3 Others

Rahul Kumar @ Rahul Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Nishant Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Maynoor @ Sharukh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Anand Singh @ Chunna Vs State of U.P. through Secretary, Home Department Civil Secretariat, Lucknow