Allowed

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

Allahabad HC13 Oct 2025BAIL/35108/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under POCSO and BNS provisions for alleged enticement of a minor girl. Court considered contradictory statements of the victim, medical findings, and age evidence, and allowed bail on personal bond with two sureties and standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 106 of 2025 on personal bond with two local sureties, subject to conditions including no tampering with evidence or harassment of witnesses.

Antu vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35108 of 2025

Antu

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others

¶6

	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Ram Babu Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 65

¶8

HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.

¶9

Despite service of notice none has appeared on behalf of informant even in the revised call.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is named in the F.I.R. along with two other accused. The F.I.R. alleges allegation against the applicant that had enticed away the minor daughter of the informant who was studied in Class-X and at the time leaving her house she also took twenty five thousand rupees and gold ornaments. When the victim was recovered her statement under Sections 180 B.N.S.S. was recorded wherein she has not made any allegation against the applicant, whereas, in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS she has developed her case by stating that applicant had committed wrong with her, however, in both the statements she admits that she went with the applicant on her own volition and went to Rajasthan where she lived with the applicant for one day. Thus, learned counsel argued that there are material contradictions in the version of the victim. In her medical examination no internal or external injury was found on the person of the victim. As per highschool certificate of the victim she was more than sixteen years of age at the time occurrence, thus, taking benefit of two years either side the victim is major. 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 26.04.2025, with no criminal history.

¶12

BAIL No. 35108 of 2025

¶13

¶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.

¶15

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of 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.

¶16

Let the applicant-Antu, be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 106 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 142, 65(1) of B.N.S. and Section 3/4(2) of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, Police StationIndergarh, District- Kannauj, 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:

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

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.

¶22

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.

¶23

(Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.)

¶24

December 1, 2025

¶25

Mustaqeem.

¶26

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Salman vs State of U.P.

Vedprakas vs State of U.P.

Jagdish Kumar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Karan vs State of U.P.

Rohit Kashyap vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Kartar Alias Krishna vs State of U.P. and 3 Others