Krishna Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy./ Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:20507

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2997 of 2025

Applicant :- Krishna Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy./ Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Ajay Upadhyay, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anurag Verma, learned A.G.A.-I appearing on behalf of the State and perused the records. The supplementary affidavit filed today in court is taken on record.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 0331 of 2024, under Sections 70(2) B.N.S. and Section 5/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered at Police Station Rajesultanpur, District Ambedkar Nagar.

¶8

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 21.11.2024 against the applicant and Krishna Kumar alleging that while the informant's daughter aged about 16 years had gone to fields to attend the call of nature at about 11.00 p.m. on 20.11.2024 the accused persons took her outside the village near a canal and raped her. Upon coming back home the victim was afraid and when the informant and his wife made enquiries from her, she told that the accused persons had raped her. As it was late in the night the informant did not go to the police and he had come to lodge the F.I.R. in the morning.

¶9

In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 BNSS although she supported the allegation of commission of rape by the accused persons, she stated that after coming home she had slept. In the morning she told about the incident to her brother who in turn told the same to her parents. During medico legal examination, no mark of injury or sign of use of force has been found on any part of her body.

¶10

In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 BNSS, she alleged commission of rape by both the accused persons. She stated that the co-accused Arjun had videographed the incident. She further stated that she was not in any love affair and the accused persons treated her like their sister and after the incident both of them dropped her home.

¶11

In the affidavit filed in support of bail application it has been stated that the applicant is a 20 years old young man, he has been falsely implicated in the present case. A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant showing his involvement in another case in which he has been granted bail. It has also been submitted on behalf of the applicant that a coaccused Arjun has already been enlarged on bail by this court by means of an order dated 25.03.2025, passed in Criminal misc. Bail Application No.2503 of 2025.

¶12

The learned State Counsel has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the allegations are serious and the same have been established during investigation and a charge sheet has been submitted on 31.12.2024.

¶13

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that in the F.I.R. lodged at 14.13 hrs. on 21.11.2024, the informant stated that the victim

¶14

told about the incident after returning home in the night itself, whereas the victim stated that she slept after coming back in the night and told her brother about the incident in the morning; that no mark of injury or sign of use of force has been found during medico legal examination and that the applicant is a young boy and he is languishing in jail since 22.11.2024, whereas the investigation stands concluded and and the coaccused has been granted bail 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.

¶15

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶16

Let the applicant- Krishna Kumar 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:-

¶17

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

¶18

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶19

(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 :- 11.4.2025 Ram.

¶22

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

Krishna Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy./ Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishna Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy./ Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. 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

Bhanu @ Chandrabhan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Upendra Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Govt. of U.P. Lko.

Prem Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lucknow

Prashant Kumar Tripathi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Maya Devi @ Maya Singh vs State of Up Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Vibhor Sahu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Govt. Lko and Another