Kailash Nishad vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:69812

Court No. - 65

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11884 of 2025

Applicant :- Kailash Nishad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sunit Kumar,Yatish Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Learned State Law Officer has informed that notice to the informant has been served on 5.4.2025.

¶8

Compliance affidavit filed by learned State Law Officer is taken on record.

¶9

Heard Sri Sunit Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri R.P. Patel, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶10

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 165 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(i) B.N.S. and 3/4(2) POCSO Act, Police Station Aata, District Jalaun, during the pendency of trial.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by two days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused.

¶12

It is further stated that as per ossification test report, the victim is 20 years old. She is the consenting party, as is evident from her statement recorded u/s 183 B.N.S.S.

¶13

There is no medical corroboration of the incident. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 15.10.2024. 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 but has not disputed the aforesaid submissions of

¶15

learned counsel for the applicant.

¶16

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, the victim being the consenting party and the delay in institution of FIR, 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 .

¶17

Let the applicant- Kailash Nishad, 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.

¶18

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.

¶19

(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.

¶20

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

¶21

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.

¶22

Order Date :- 2.5.2025 Shalini

¶23

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶24

Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Kailash Nishad v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kailash Nishad 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

Ramkumar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Satyam @ Sooraj Yadav vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Bantu Alias Raman Babu vs State of U.P.

Subhash vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mohd. Yunus vs State of U.P.

Sohel vs State of U.P. and 3 Others