Afran Ali Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:83093

Court No. - 65 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15765 of 2025 Applicant :- Afran Ali Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Prakash Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶4

List has been revised. As informed by learned State Law Officer, notice to the informant has been served on 06.05.2025 but none is present on behalf of the informant.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Ravindra Prakash Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sushil Kumar Shukla, learned State Law Officer and perused the record.

¶7

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 68 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 87, 64 of BNS and Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Dudhara, District Sant Kabir Nagar, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

As per prosecution story, the niece of the informant was missing since 04.03.2025 at about 7 p.m., later on it was revealed that it was the applicant who has enticed her away, as such the FIR was instituted by the informant on 13.03.2025.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by about 9 days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused.

¶10

Learned counsel has also stated that the victim is major, although as per ossification test report, she is 16 years old and a leverage of two years may be granted to the applicant on upper side in light of law laid down by Supreme Court. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. The victim is a consenting party as she had gone with the applicant all the way to Mumbai and has not raised any alarm during the said sojourn whatsoever.

¶11

There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 18.03.2025 and he is ready to cooperate

¶12

with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶13

Per contra, learned State Law Officer has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶14

With respect to the age of the victim, a leverage of two years can be granted to the applicant on the upper side in light of the judgement of Supreme Court passed in Jaya Mala Vs. State of J & K, (1982) 2 SCC 538 and Mohd. Imran Khan vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), (2011) 10 SCC 192 , whereby it has been opined that the radiologist cannot predict the correct date of birth rather there is a long margin of 1 to 2 years on either side.

¶15

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the delay in FIR and considering the fact that the victim is a consenting party, I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed .

¶16

Let the applicant- Afran Ali , 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.

¶17

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant shall not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses.

¶18

iii) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed.

¶19

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

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 19.5.2025 Sumit S

¶22

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SUMIT SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Afran Ali v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Afran Ali 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases