Sahabuddin vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:75455

Court No. - 65

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11645 of 2025

Applicant :- Sahabuddin Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Balram Jee Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Compliance affidavit filed by learned State Law Officer is taken on record. As per the ossification test report, the victim is 15 years old. Learned State Law Officer has informed that notice to the informant has been served on 7.4.2025.

¶8

Heard Sri Vikram Yadav, Advocate holding brief of Sri Balram Jee Verma, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajendra Prasad Singh, learned State Law Officer and perused the material placed on record.

¶9

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.31 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 65(1), 87 B.N.S. and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station- Gulriha, District- Gorakhpur, 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. He has nothing to do with the said offence. The FIR is delayed by about two days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the victim is a consenting party as is but evident from her statement recorded U/s 183 B.N.S.S. whereby she has expressed her willingness to marry the applicant. The victim by her looks seems to be major, although she is stated to be 15 years old as per the ossification test report.

¶12

It is also argued by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no medical corroboration of the incident. There is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail

¶13

since 19.1.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶14

Learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶15

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the delay in institution of FIR and the statement of the victim recorded U/s 183 B.N.S.S. coupled by the fact that there is no medical corroboration of the incident, 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- Sahabuddin , 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 :- 9.5.2025 Vikas

¶22

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶23

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sahabuddin 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Kasim vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Durgesh Giri vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Nadeem vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rishabh Mishra vs State of U.P. and Another

Sikandra vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Adil @ Ayush Gurjar vs State of U.P.