Vipin Pal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:18554

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1583 of 2025

Applicant :- Vipin Pal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Ravindra Shukla, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Diwakar Singh, the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 531 of 2024, under Sections 70(2), 351(3) B.N.S., Section 5/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 3 (2) (v) SC/ST Act, registered at Police Station Sushant Golf City, District Lucknow.

¶8

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 07.10.2024 against three persons, including the applicant and an unknown person stating that the co-accused Nikhil repetitively made physical relations with the informant under the allurement of marrying her due to which she became pregnant. The co-accused Nikhil administered some medicine causing miscarriage of the informant. After some time the informant again got pregnant and when she asked to marry, the co-accused Nikhil declined to marry her. She further stated that the applicant, co-accused Nitin Yadav and another person took her to a rented room, gave her some intoxicating substance and made physical relations with her in the state of intoxication and

¶9

prepared obscene video. She further alleged that the accused persons threatened her to spread the video virally.

¶10

In the affidavit filed in support of bail application it has been stated that the applicant is a young man aged 20 years, he is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history. In the statement of the informant recorded under Section 180 BNSS she reiterated the F.I.R. version. In her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS also the informant reiterated her earlier version. The medico legal examination report mentions that the victim is 34 weeks pregnant. A co-accused namely Gaurav Singh @ Gaurav has already been enlarged on bail by this court by means of an order dated 24.02.2025, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.1601 of 2025.

¶11

The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and on the basis of instructions he has submitted that the allegations have been established during investigation and a charge sheet has been submitted on 05.12.2024. However, in response to a specific query he has submitted that the allegation of preparation of obscene video could not be established during investigation.

¶12

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the informant has said that she was in a relationship with the co-accused Nikhil and the F.I.R. has been lodged when the co-accused Nikhil declined to marry her after having repetitively made physical relations under the allurement of marrying her; that the allegation against the applicant is having physically exploited the informant along with other accused person, making obscene video of the incident and having blackmailed the informant on strength thereof, which allegations could not be established during

¶13

investigation and that a co-accused person has already been granted bail and that the applicant is a young man having no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 09.10.2024 and the investigation already stands concluded and without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, I am 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.

¶14

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶15

Let the applicant-Vipin Pal be released on bail in the aforesaid 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:-

¶16

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

¶17

(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 appearance is exempted by the learned trial court.

¶18

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

¶19

Order Date :- 3.4.2025 Ram.

¶20

Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Vipin Pal v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vipin Pal v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Deptt. of 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

Amitabh Kumar Srivastava @ Amitabh Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Lko.

Amitabh Kumar Srivastava @ Amitabh Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Lko.

Amitabh Kumar Srivastava @ Amitabh Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko

Manvendra Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Anupam Verma @ Ampoo Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and 4 Others

Dipanshu Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and 3 Others