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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:30992

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12998 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Raju Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. And 3 Others

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Ramakar Shukla,Ankit Mishra,Ankit Tripathi,Prince Verma,Subodh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mohd Javed,Rizwanul Haque Ansari

¶6

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶7

Heard Shri Ankit Tripathi, the learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Alok Kumar Tiwari, the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records.

¶8

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.280 of 2024 under Sections 137(2), 87, 64, 115(2) of B.N.S., Section 3/4 (2) of P.O.C.S.O. Act registered at Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, DistrictSitapur.

¶9

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 14.08.2024 stating that the applicant had enticed away the informant's daughter on 13.08.2024.

¶10

The victim was recovered on 04.09.2024 and in her statement recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S., she stated that she was in a relationship with the applicant for the past one year, the applicant used to say that he would marry her. She had gone with her to Himachal Pradesh where she stayed with him as his wife in a rented room.

¶11

The medico-legal examination report of the victim mentions

¶12

no mark of injury or sign of use of force.

¶13

In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S., she stated that she had been talking to the applicant for the past one year, she had gone with him to Himachal Pradesh and she stayed with him for 22 days.

¶14

In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is a young man aged 24 years having no criminal history and he has been falsely implicated in the present case.

¶15

The State has filed a counter affidavit opposing the bail application annexing therewith copies of material collected during investigation and a copy of charge-sheet submitted on 22.09.2024.

¶16

A rejoinder affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant annexing therewith a copy of the statement of the victim recorded by the trial Court.

¶17

The victim has stated that she was not in love with any boy and she has not gone away with any boy. She further stated that she knows the boy whom she love but then she said that she does not love any person. The victim stated that she did not love the applicant. She did not talk to the boy through phone.

¶18

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the statements of the victim recorded under Section 180 and 183 B.N.S.S.; that the medicolegal examination report does not reveal use of force by the applicant and that the applicant is a young man aged 24 years having no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 06.09.2024 and as the statement of the victim has already been recorded by the trial Court, in case of his release on bail, the applicant will not be in a position to influence the victim, I am

¶19

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

¶20

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶21

Let the applicant - Raju be released on bail in the aforementioned 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:-

¶22

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

¶23

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses; (iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court, unless his/her appearance exempted by the trial Court.

¶24

[Subhash Vidyarthi, J.]

¶25

Order Date :- 23.5.2025

¶26

-Amit K-

¶27

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. 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

Ravi Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Chandrabhan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Vikas Tiwari vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. of U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Pushpa Pal @ Km Pushpa vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Chhote Lal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Dharmendra Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.