Chhotu Alias Puneet Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:81002

Court No. - 65

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13589 of 2025

Applicant :- Chhotu Alias Puneet Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

As informed by learned A.G.A., notice has been served to the informant on 11.4.2025.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri A.K. Shukla, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶9

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 31 of 2025, U/S 137(2), 352, 65(1) B.N.S., 2023 and 5(1)/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Kotwali, District Gorakhpur, during the pendency of trial.

¶10

As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have enticed away the minor daughter of the informant on 3.2.2025.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. It is stated that he has nothing to do with the said offence. It is stated that FIR is delayed by two days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. There is no time of offence mentioned in the FIR.

¶12

Learned counsel has further stated that the victim is the consenting party, as is evident from her statement recorded u/s 183 B.N.S.S., whereby she has stated that she had gone with the applicant out of her own sweet will and had not returned to her house, as her father used to beat her up, although she has stated that she had established corporeal relationship with the applicant out of her consent. The applicant himself is a youth, aged about 18 years. There is no medical corroboration of the incident.

¶13

There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 12.2.2025. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the victim is minor, being 14 years old, as per ossification test report, as such, her consent, if any, cannot be taken into consideration in the eyes of law.

¶15

POCSO was formulated to protect children under the age of 18 years from sexual exploitation. Nowadays more often than not it has become a tool for their exploitation. The Act was never meant to criminalise consensual romantic relationships between adolescents. However, this has to be seen from the facts and circumstances of each case.

¶16

The fact of consensual relationship borne out of love should be of consideration while granting bail because it would amount to perversity of justice if the statement of victim was ignored and accused was left to suffer behind jail.

¶17

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, the delay in institution of FIR, the statement recorded u/s 183 B.N.S.S. and there being no medical corroboration of the incident, 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 .

¶18

Let the applicant- Chhotu Alias Puneet involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

¶19

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.

¶20

(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.

¶21

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶22

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.

¶23

Order Date :- 16.5.2025 Shalini

¶24

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶25

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

Chhotu Alias Puneet v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chhotu Alias Puneet 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