Aman Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.239 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 87, 351(2), 143(3), 64 BNS & Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act, P.S. Kunda, District Pratapgarh.

¶14

In the F.I.R. it is alleged that daughter of the informant aged about 17 years has been enticed away by the applicant on 16.08.2024 at about 04:00 pm.

¶15

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that victim in her statement under Section 180 BNSS has stated that after being annoyed with her father she went away to Gonda from her home. He submits that no allegation on anybody has been levelled by the victim in the first statement under Section 180 BNSS however, while giving statement under Section 183 BNSS prosecution story has been changed totally and allegation of rape has been levelled on the applicant. At the same time, it

¶16

BAIL No. 284 of 2025

¶17

2

¶18

has been stated by the victim that she stayed at the house of the applicant for five days. It has been further alleged that she is in active relationship with the applicant for the last two years. No corroborative material has been found in the medical examination. As per the radio-logical examination, victim is 18 years old as her date of birth is 01.01.2007. He submits that the applicant is in jail since 31.08.2024.

¶19

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer.

¶20

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record as also the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 31.08.2024, contradictory statement of the victim under Sections 180 & 183 BNSS, lack of corroborative medical evidence, applicant has explained the criminal history in the supplementary affidavit, chargesheet has been filed and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶21

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶22

Let the applicant Aman Kumar Yadav be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:

¶23

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶24

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶25

(iii) 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶26

(iv) 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.

¶27

BAIL No. 284 of 2025

¶28

3

¶29

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Panel Code (now Section 269 of BNS).

¶30

(vi) 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. (now Section 84 BNSS) is issued and the 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 174-A of the Indian Panel Code (now Section 209 BNS).

¶31

August 27, 2025 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶32

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶33

Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Aman Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aman Kumar Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. 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

Brij Mohan Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home

Hameed Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Rajendra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Shivam Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Chandan @ Chandra Kishor Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. of U.P. and 3 Others

Harishchandra @ Hari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.