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

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:43415

Court No. - 14

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 180 of 2025 Applicant :- Nijamuddin Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ramakar Shukla,Abhinav Singh,Aman Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajay Kumar Tripathi,Vijay Kumar

¶4

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State as well as learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record.

¶7

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the minor son of the complainant was dragged into the maize field and was subjected to unnatural sex by the accused persons.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the occurrence according to the prosecution has taken place on 13.08.2024. However, the FIR has been lodged after a delay of six days on 19.08.2024. As per the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, he has received multiple injuries. However, as per the medico legal examination of the victim, there is no mark of internal or external injury seen on his body. The anal swab of the victim was sent to F.S.L. In that also, no corroborative material has been found.

¶9

It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 7.10.2024. Till date, only one prosecution witness (victim) has been examined and thus, the trial is not likely to be concluded in the near future. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for bail.

¶11

Learned counsel for the complainant could not assign any reason as to why the FIR has not been lodged in time.

¶12

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record, the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, lack of corroborative evidence, medico legal examination of the victim so also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history; he is languishing in jail since 7.10.2024; till date, only one prosecution witness (victim) has

¶13

been examined; the trial is not likely to be concluded in the near future as well as the judgement of the Apex Court in re: Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh vs. State of Maharashtra, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1693 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶14

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶15

Let the applicant- Nijamuddin involved in Case Crime No. 363 of 2024, under Sections 115(2) of B.N.S. & Section 5M/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Mallawan, District- Hardoi, 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 with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

(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.

¶19

(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.

¶20

(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 in accordance with law.

¶21

(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 B.N.S.S. 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 209 of B.N.S.

¶22

Order Date :- 28.7.2025 Shravan

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

Junaid Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko.

Ajay Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 2 Others

Himanshu Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Harikesh Pandey @ Harikesh Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Raj Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Jagdish Mahawat Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.