Mohd.Sarim Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 4 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:17987

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2678 of 2025

Applicant :- Mohd.Sarim Khan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 4 Others

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Singh,Sushil Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶7

Heard Sri Ashutosh Singh, the learned counsel for the applicant, Smt. Shikha Sinha, the learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Awanish Kumar Upadhyay, Advocate who has put in appearance on behalf of the informant and filed his vakalatnama, which is taken on record.

¶8

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.917 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 87, 64 of B.N.S. and Section 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered at Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Sultanpur.

¶9

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 18.12.2024 stating that the applicant had enticed away the informant's daughter aged about 15 years at about 3.00-4.00 Hrs. on 17.12.2024 and the informant's daughter had taken away jewelry worth rupees ten lacs and Rs.45,000/- cash with her.

¶10

In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 BNSS she stated that her date of birth is 23.04.2009, she loves the applicant and wants to marry him. Her family members are not agreeing and they harass her. For this reason she had called the applicant by making a phone call and had gone with him.

¶11

When the applicant's family members informed about lodging of the F.I.R. she came back. She stated that she wants to marry the applicant. She categorically denied the allegation that she had taken away any money or jewelry and she stated that her family members have levelled false allegations for entangling the applicant. A similar statement was given by the victim before the Magistrate also. The medico legal examination report of the victim mentions no mark of any injury or sign of use of force.

¶12

In the affidavit filed in support of bail application it has been stated that the applicant is a young man aged 20 years, he is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. In para 23 of the affidavit the applicant's involvement in Case Crime No.144 of 2024, under Sections 115(2), 352, 351(2) and 351(3) B.N.S. Police Station Dhammaur, District Sultanpur has been disclosed, but he has not received any summon or notice in that case.

¶13

The learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and she has submitted that the victim is a minor, therefore, her consent is of no meaning. She further stated that the allegations have been established during investigation and a charge sheet has been submitted on 23.01.2025. Similar submissions have been made by learned counsel for the informant.

¶14

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the consistent statements of victim that she loves the applicant and she had gone with him out of her own freewill and that she has not levelled any allegation of use of force by the applicant; that the victim categorically stated that her parents have falsely alleged taking away cash and jewelry so as to falsely implicate the applicant and that the

¶15

investigation already stands concluded and the applicant is languishing in jail since 24.12.2024 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-Mohd.Sarim Khan be released on bail in the 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:-

¶18

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

¶19

(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 :- 1.4.2025 Ram.

¶22

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

Mohd.Sarim Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd.Sarim Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 4 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

Master Shrihan Thru. His Mother Dr. Shilpy Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Ajeet Kumar Gupta @ Ajeet Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.

C/M, U.P. Prathamik Shikshak Sangh, Lko. Thru. General Secy. Uma Shankar Singh and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. and Institutional Finance and Others

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

Shikha Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Mohd. Faiz @ Faiz Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy Home Lko.