Allowed

Rohit v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC2 Jun 2025BAIL/12539/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by an accused in a POCSO Act case, citing delay in FIR lodging, improvements in prosecution story, and lack of corroborative medical evidence, while noting the applicant had no criminal history and was in jail for some time.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to the applicant on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties, subject to standard conditions.

Rohit vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12539 of 2024

Rohit

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others

¶7

	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Narendra Gupta, Anurag Singh : G.A.

¶8

Court No. - 12

¶9

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

¶10

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

¶11

Learned A.G.A. on the basis of written instructions submits that notices to the complainant is served.

¶12

None appears for the complainant.

¶13

The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.314 of 2024, under Sections 140(1), 352, 351(3), 65(1), 127(4) BNS and Sections 3/4(2) of the POCSO Act, P.S. Sadarpur, District Sitapur.

¶14

In the prosecution case it is alleged that minor daughter of the informant aged about 14 years while she was in her in-laws house in District Sitapur on 24.08.2024 at about 09:00 pm when she went to ease out towards fields, named accused persons who were already present there have enticed her away forcibly.

¶15

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the statement under Section 180 BNSS victim has clearly stated that applicant has not committed rape. While giving statement under Section 183 BNSS improvement has been made and for the first time allegation of rape has been levelled by the victim. In the radio-logical examination, victim has been found to be 16-17 years. The F.I.R. has been lodged after delay of 15

¶16

BAIL No. 12539 of 2024

¶17

¶18

days without any explanation. There is lack of corroborative injury or any other material in the medico legal examination of the victim. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 02.10.2024.

¶19

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer.

¶20

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 02.10.2024 having no criminal history, delay in lodging the F.I.R., improvement made in the prosecution case, lack of corroborative medical evidence and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶21

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶22

Let the applicant Rohit 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:

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

(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.

¶26

(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.

¶27

(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).

¶28

BAIL No. 12539 of 2024

¶29

¶30

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

¶31

September 12, 2025 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶32

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶33

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

Rohit v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home 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

Mohd. Rashid Vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry Information and Technology New Delhi and 5 Others

Pradeep Nath Sharma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Irrigation U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Pooja Saroj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Bal Vikas Evam Pustahar Vibhag, Lko. and 6 Others

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

Man Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow and 3 Others

Ashraf vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. of U.P. Lko. and 3 Others