Ehsaan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.61 of 2024, under Section 70(2) of BNS and Sections 5/6 of POCSO Act, P.S. Inhauna, District Raebareli.

¶12

In the prosecution case it is alleged that on 03.08.2024 minor daughter of the informant aged about 14 years while going to deliver the milk to one Ajay Tiwari on the way applicant along with his companion in intoxicated condition while catching the hand of the victim started molesting her. Upon objection being raised, she was badly beaten.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that varied statements have been given by the victim under Sections 180 & 183 BNSS. Victim, her mother and father i.e. P.W.1, P.W.2 and P.W.3 have been examined before the trial court. Victim has been declared hostile and has not supported the prosecution case. Applicant has no criminal history. Applicant is in jail since 07.08.2024, there is no chance of tampering the prosecution witness.

¶14

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

¶15

Perused the record as well as the report submitted by the learned special court dated 11.09.2025.

¶16

BAIL No. 13167 of 2024

¶17

2

¶18

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 07.08.2024 having no criminal history, victim has been declared hostile, total three witnesses of fact have been examined, there appears to be no chance of tampering the 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.

¶19

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶20

Let the applicant Ehsaan 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:

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

(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.

¶24

(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.

¶25

(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).

¶26

(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).

¶27

At this stage, Sri Anurag Verma, learned A.G.A. has submitted that liberty is granted to the State to recover the compensation amount from the victim as well as the complainant, if the same has been given to them.

¶28

BAIL No. 13167 of 2024

¶29

3

¶30

Liberty prayed for is granted.

¶31

September 26, 2025 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶32

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶33

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ehsaan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 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

Smt. Rama Devi Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Rustam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief/ Prin. Secy Home Lko. and 4 Others

Waseeb Ahmad (Basib Ahmad) Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Neeraj Yadav Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Others

Rakesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.