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

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:16401

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2414 of 2025

Applicant :- Lavkush Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Firoz Ahmad Khan,Avinash Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Avinash Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anurag Verma, learned A.G.A.-I 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. 186 of 2024, under Sections 107, 74 of B.N.S. and Section 7/8 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered at Police Station Haidarganj, District Ayodhya.

¶8

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 20.12.2024 alleging that the informant's sister aged about 16 years committed suicide on 14.12.2024. An information of this incident was given by the informant's father to the police, where after the inquest proceedings and postmortem examination were conducted. At the time of incident the informant had taken his mother to the house of her brother. After coming home and seeing the incident she had fallen unconscious. After the postmortem examination the informant's mother told that the applicant who is a teacher in the school in which the deceased used to study was harassing her for the past one year. On the date of incident i.e. 14.12.2024 also the applicant had talked to his sister whereafter she

¶9

committed suicide.

¶10

In the affidavit filed in support of bail application it has been stated that the applicant is a 29 years old innocent person, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history.

¶11

The inquest report and the postmortem examination report of the deceased mentions her age to be 18 years. The cause of death has been opined to be asphyxia as a result of ante mortem hanging. The informant reiterated the F.I.R. version in his statement under Section 180 BNSS to the Investigating Officer. A neighbor Shilpi Dubey stated that the deceased had come to her home on 14.12.2024 and had asked the witness's bhabhi to give her mobile phone. She did not give her mobile phone. The deceased had asked for the phone of witness and had taken the same to her home. She returned to her with phone after some time. After a short while thereafter a phone call was received on her mobile from the mobile phone of the applicant. The witness asked the victim as to why she talks to the person, whereupon she told that the applicant was molesting and threatening her. She stated that she wish to die. After some time the deceased committed suicide.

¶12

In his custodial statement the applicant stated that he had taught the deceased from class 6 to 11. On 14.12.2024 several calls were received from a mobile number but the applicant was engaged talking to some other person. When he called back that number some unknown lady picked up the phone and she said that she will make him talk and thereafter the deceased called from the said number and said that she would talk later. The applicant stated that he did not ever make a phone call to the deceased and he did not molest her. The deceased used to call him whenever she faced any difficulty in her studies. The

¶13

applicant further stated that the last conversation ran for few seconds only which has been supported by the call detail records mentioned in the case diary.

¶14

The learned A.G.A.-I has opposed the prayer for bail and he has submitted on the basis of written instructions received by him that the information of this bail application has been delivered to the informant through Police Station Haidarganj, District Ayodhya. He has further submitted that the applicant was teacher of the deceased and he was in guardianly position. The applicant's conduct does not warrant exercise of discretion of this court by enlarging him on bail.

¶15

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the victim committed suicide on 14.12.2024; that although information of suicide was given to the police and inquest proceedings and postmortem were conducted, there was no mention of any misdeed committed by the applicant; that the F.I.R. was lodged six days after the incident; that besides some conversation running into few seconds only, there is no other material and the applicant's explanation that the conversations were initiated by the deceased and those were normally in relation to problems faced by her in her studies; that the applicant has no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 25.12.2024 and charge sheet has been submitted in the case on 12.02.2025 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.

¶16

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶17

Let the applicant-Lavkush Singh be released on bail in the

¶18

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:-

¶19

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

¶20

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

¶21

Order Date :- 21.3.2025 Ram.

¶22

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

Lavkush Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lavkush Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. 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

Shivraj Verma @ Dharme @ Dharmraj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Vishram Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Manju Singh (Vikas Ki Maa as Per Fir) Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Indu Kumari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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