Pankaj Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:100381

Court No. - 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19832 of 2025

Applicant :- Pankaj Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Dhanraj Singh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A for the State.

¶7

There is allegation against the applicant of abduction of minor girl with intent to marry, commission of offence of rape and offence u/s 5M/6 POCSO Act.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim in her statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C. has claimed her age as 18 years. She has admitted that the applicant is her cousin. He took her to Mumbai and she became pregnant. Thereafter, he started beating her after consuming liquor and therefore, she came back to her parents. She has admitted having her love affair with the applicant and a child aged 1 year. It is further submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated and is in jail since 25.02.2025 and has no criminal history to his credit.

¶9

On the other hand, learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶10

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Manish

¶11

Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 LawSuit (SC) 677 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and 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.

¶12

Let the applicant, Pankaj Singh, involved in Special Session Trial Case No. 502 of 2025 arising out of Case Crime No. 336 of 2022, under Sections- 363, 366, 323, 376AB I.P.C. and Section 5M/6 POCSO Act, Police Station- Ghatampur, District- Kanpur Nagar, 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.

¶13

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶14

(ii) 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.

¶15

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(iv) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear

¶17

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 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

(v) The applicant shall remain present in person before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. 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.

¶19

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

¶20

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶21

Order Date :- 27.6.2025 KS

¶22

Digitally signed by :- KISHAN SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pankaj Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankaj Singh 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