Awdhesh Kumar @ Ajay Devgan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:91168

Court No. - 65

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17221 of 2025

Applicant :- Awdhesh Kumar @ Ajay Devgan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Ojha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised. As informed by learned State Law Officer, notice to the informant has been served on 18.05.2025 but none is present on behalf of the informant.

¶7

Heard Sri Anil Kumar Ojha, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Amit Kumar, learned State Law Officer and perused the record.

¶8

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 21 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) of BNS and Sections 3/4(2) of POCSO Act, Police Station Pannuganj, District Sonbhadra, during the pendency of trial.

¶9

As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have enticed away the victim on 26.01.2025 at about 6 p.m.

¶10

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 one day and there is no explanation of the said delay caused.

¶11

Learned counsel has also stated that the victim is a consenting party as is but evident from her statement recorded u/s 183 BNSS whereby she has stated that she, earlier on also, was enticed away by the applicant and her family members had entered into compromise with him after taking Rs.80,000/-. The said fact of applicant enticing away the victim earlier on also stands fortified from the FIR itself. There is no medical corroboration of the incident.

¶12

There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is

¶13

languishing in jail since 28.01.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶14

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.

¶15

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration the delay in institution of FIR, taking into account the statement of the victim recorded under section 183 BNSS and there being no medical corroboration of the incident, I find it a fit case to release the applicant on bail. The bail application is allowed .

¶16

Let the applicant- Awdhesh Kumar @ Ajay Devgan , 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 :- 28.5.2025 Sumit S

¶22

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶23

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

Awdhesh Kumar @ Ajay Devgan v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Awdhesh Kumar @ Ajay Devgan 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