Sharik Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that though in the F.I.R. as well as in his statement recorded under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. the victim has made specific allegation of sexual assault against the applicant but during the course of trial the victim made his deposition as P.W.2 and in his cross-examination he has not made any allegation against the applicant and has not supported the prosecution case. Thus, it has been argued that applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that the applicant is in jail since 11.08.2024, with no criminal history.

¶14

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence, but he has not disputed the above submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶15

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of

¶16

BAIL No. 24810 of 2025

¶17

2

¶18

allegations, the gravity of offence and without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

¶19

Let the applicant- Sharik, be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 148 of 2024, under Section 377 I.P.C. read with Section 3/4 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act and Section 67a of Information of Technology Act, Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Saharanpur, on executing a personal bond and furnishing two local sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶20

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶21

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.

¶22

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.

¶23

iv) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.

¶24

v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶25

In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the court concerned shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of applicant in accordance with law.

¶26

(Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.)

¶27

September 19, 2025 Mustaqeem.

¶28

Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sharik v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sharik 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