Ankit @ Ankit Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:49510

Court No. - 12

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11096 of 2024

Applicant :- Ankit @ Ankit Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Pathak,Ankit Mishra,Atish Kumar Singh,Himanshu Tiwari,Mohd Tanveer Raza,Priyanka Tiwari,Rahul Kumar Singh,Rahul Yadav,Rishabh Sharma,Yogesh Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶7

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the victim, who is the complainant, went to Lucknow with the applicant and stayed there for one week. It is alleged that the applicant on the pretext of marriage sexually exploited her. On being asked to marry her, the applicant has refused to do so.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent. The version of the FIR and the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS are varying. There is no corroborative material against the applicant. He has been falsely implicated in the present case.

¶9

It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 2.9.2024. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record, the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS which prima facie do no show that there is any allegation of promise to marry so also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history; he is languishing in jail since 2.9.2024 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶12

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶13

Let the applicant- Ankit @ Ankit Kumar involved in Case Crime No. 337 of 2024, under Sections 69, 352 of B.N.S., Police Station- Atrauli, District- Hardoi, 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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 in accordance with law.

¶19

(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 B.N.S.S. 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 209 of B.N.S.

¶20

Order Date :- 22.8.2025 Shravan

¶21

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ankit @ Ankit Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ankit @ Ankit Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Pradeep Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Ram Sajivan Rajak @ Ram Sajivan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Suraj Noniya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Jameel Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Sectt. Lko

Smt Sharda Shukla vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Tapish Sharma vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Deptt. of Home Govt. of U.P. and 2 Others