Ramkesh vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:48511

Court No. - 65

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10986 of 2025

Applicant :- Ramkesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Narayan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. has informed that notice to the informant has been served on 20.3.2025.

¶8

Heard Sri Raj Narayan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶9

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.325 of 2024, under Sections 363, 376(2) I.P.C. and 5/6 POCSO Act, Police StationKarwi Kotwali Nagar, District- Chitrakoot, during the pendency of trial.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The victim is a consenting party as is but evident from her statement recorded U/s 164 Cr.P.C. The victim is pregnant and has expressed her desire to live with the applicant. The victim by her looks seems to be major, although she is stated to be 15 years old as per the FIR. The age of the victim has deliberately been suppressed by the informant.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the applicant is ready to take care of the victim to whom he has already married. There is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 25.12.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail

¶13

application.

¶14

In light of the judgement of the Supreme Court passed in Niranjan Singh and another vs Prabhakar Rajaram Kharote and others AIR 1980 SC 785, this Court has avoided detailed examination of the evidence and elaborate documentation of the merits of the case as no party should have the impression that his case has been prejudiced. A prima facie satisfaction of case is needed but it is not the same as an exhaustive exploration of the merits in the order itself.

¶15

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking into consideration the settled law of the Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690 and Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595 and 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 .

¶16

Let the applicant- Ramkesh , who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶17

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.

¶18

(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.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 5.4.2025 Vikas

¶22

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶23

Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ramkesh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramkesh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Manuj Kumar @ Anurag @ Mannu vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Kalindi Charan Alias Kali Charan vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sonu Kumar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ravi Kashyap vs State of U.P.

Rajendra Chauhan vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ritik Alias Pawan vs State of U.P. and 3 Others