Allowed

Mohd Shadab v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 3 Others

Allahabad HC18 Aug 2025BAIL/10995/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application in a gang rape case involving a minor victim under BNS, POCSO and SC/ST provisions. Court noted contradictions in the victim's statements regarding the number of assailants, absence of injuries and inconclusive medical opinion, conflicting age evidence, and the applicant's clean record, and granted bail.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Mohd Shadab to be released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to stated conditions including non-tampering, witness protection and trial attendance.

Mohd Shadab Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:48356

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10995 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Mohd Shadab Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ajitanshu Tripathi,Alok Srivastava,Anil Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, 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.154 of 2024, under Sections 70(2), 65(1), 115, 352 BNS, Sections 5(G)/6 of POCSO Act and Sections 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Khodare, District Gonda.

¶8

In the prosecution case it is alleged that while the daughter of the informant went to ease out on 19.07.2024 in the evening at about 09:00 pm along with her mother, two named accused persons have dragged her inside the sugarcane filed after gagging her mouth and raped her one by one. It is alleged that wife of the informant saw the incident. She was beaten by both of them.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the F.I.R. allegation of gang rape is on two persons, in the statement under Section 180 BNSS again two persons are alleged to have committed rape however, while giving statement under Section 183 BNSS allegation of gang rape is on three accused persons. The victim while giving statement before the court has also made allegation on three accused persons. She has also stated that she was caught by his father who brought her to his house and phone call was made to the police. In the statement

¶10

before the court, victim P.W.1 has stated that three persons have raped her and they have badly beaten her mother. He submits that in the cross, she has again changed the prosecution story.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that during medico legal examination, no internal or external injury has been found on the victim. As per the certificate issued by the Principal of Composite School on 20.07.2024, victim's date of birth is 01.01.2006. She was married at the time of incident. No definite opinion of rape has been given by the doctor while preparing the supplementary report. As per the statement of victim as well as the statement of eye witness Smt. Saroja Devi, the mother of the victim who was on the spot and is alleged eye witness was beaten by accused persons. Another eye witness Parshuram has also stated that both Taufeeq and Shadab have committed the offence of gang rape. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 21.07.2024. Applicant has no criminal history.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer however, from the record he could not inform as to from which place and how the accused Taufeeq was arrested. He also submits that victim as per the order of Bal Kalyan Samiti, Gonda dated 24.04.2024 was 15 years 24 days old at the time of incident.

¶13

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 21.07.2024, contradictory statement of the victim regarding the number of accused persons who committed the offence; fact that mother of the victim was badly beaten however, there is no medico legal examination has been done, lack of corroborative medical evidence in support of prosecution case, contradictory material regarding the age of

¶14

the victim, applicant has no criminal history, statement of eye witnesses and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶15

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶16

Let the applicant Mohd Shadab 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:

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

(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.

¶20

(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.

¶21

(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).

¶22

(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial

¶23

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

¶24

Order Date :- 18.8.2025 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶25

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

Mohd Shadab v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd Shadab v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. 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