Mohd. Mahtab Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:24550

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1177 of 2025

Applicant :- Mohd. Mahtab Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Of Home And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Apoorv Srivastava,Deeksha Jaiswal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Akash Srivastava, Advocate holding brief of Sri Apoorv Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Alok Kumar Tiwari, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the records.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 492 of 2024, under Sections 363, 366, 376(3) I.P.C., Section 5J(2)/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 3/4 U.P. Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion Religion Act, registered at Police Station Shahabad, District Hardoi.

¶8

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 19.09.2024 alleging that the applicant had enticed away the informant's daughter aged about 14 years.

¶9

In the affidavit filed in support of bail application it has been stated that the applicant is a young man aged 21 years, he is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history.

¶10

In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she stated that she is aged about 21 years, her step mother and

¶11

step brother used to beat her and she had fallen in love with the applicant and therefore she had gone with the applicant and has married him and she is pregnant due to her wedlock with the applicant.

¶12

The medico legal examination report of the victim mentions that the victim is 29 weeks pregnant. However, as per her radiological examination report the age of the victim has been opined to be about 16 years.

¶13

In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she stated that she has married with the applicant. The applicant has not converted her religion. She is pregnant and she wants to live with her husband.

¶14

A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant stating that the applicant has married the victim and he is willing to keep her with him as his wife and to take her good care.

¶15

The State has filed a counter affidavit opposing the bail application and annexing therewith copies of materials collected during investigation and a copy of charge sheet.

¶16

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the peculiar circumstances where the victim has consistently stated that she has married the applicant, she is pregnant due to her wedlock with the applicant, she wants to live with her husband and the a supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant stating that the applicant wants to keep his wife with him properly, that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 02.10.2024 and the investigation already stands concluded and without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid

¶17

facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime.

¶18

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶19

Let the applicant-Mohd. Mahtab be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶20

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶21

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶22

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his appearance is exempted by the learned trial court.

¶23

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

¶24

Order Date :- 29.4.2025 Ram.

¶25

Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd. Mahtab v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Mahtab v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home 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

Shivam Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Rajendra @ Gyani Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Rahul Dubey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Mohd. Mahtab vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home and 3 Others

Rinku vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. and 3 Others

Sandeep Madheshiya vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home District Lko. and 3 Others