Ranjeet Paal Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:115821

Court No. - 64

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24445 of 2025

Applicant :- Ranjeet Paal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Yadav,Subhash Chandra Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

List revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Subhash Chandra Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶8

This bail application under Section 483 of B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicant Ranjeet Paal, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 211 of 2025, under Section 64(1) BNS, registered at Police Station Jhagha, District Gorakhpur.

¶9

The FIR of the matter was lodged on 03.05.2025 by Om Prakash Yadav against the applicant under Section 74 BNS, 2023 and 7/8 POCSO Act, 2012 alleging therein that his daughter aged about 16 years had gone to bush beside the river to ease herself wherein the applicant came there and tried to enrage her modesty. He was tried to run away but he was apprehended. Both the persons had been taken to the police station. Report be lodged and action be taken.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that the prosecution story is false and concocted inasmuch as the victim and the applicant were consenting parties. It is submitted that although the victim has reiterated the version of the FIR in her statement under Section 180 BNSS but subsequently in her statement under Section 183 BNSS states of the applicant committing rape upon her. It is submitted that the said fact is a new fact introduced by her later on in her statement under Section 183 BNSS. It is further submitted that as per the school records, the date of birth of the victim is 02.08.2006 and as such at the time of

¶11

incident she was a major and then the police has deleted the provision of the POCSO Act. It is submitted that charge sheet in the matter has been submitted against the applicant under Section 64(1) BNS, 2023 and as such there are no chances of tampering with evidence. It is submitted that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 23 of the affidavit and is in jail since 03.05.2025.

¶12

Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

¶13

After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that although the FIR was lodged under the provision of POCSO Act also but during investigation, the same was deleted finding the victim to be a major as per school records. The factum of rape has been stated by the victim for the first time in her statement under Section 183 BNSS. Charge sheet in the matter has been submitted against the applicant.

¶14

Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶15

Let the applicant Ranjeet Paal , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on 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 prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶17

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶18

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

¶19

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during

¶20

trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under section 84 BNSS, 2023 may be issued and if 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 BNS, 2023.

¶21

(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 351 BNSS, 2023. 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 BNS, 2023.

¶22

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶23

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶24

The bail application is allowed .

¶25

Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

¶26

(Samit Gopal, J.)

¶27

Order Date :- 17.7.2025 M. ARIF

¶28

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ranjeet Paal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjeet Paal v. State of U.P.

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