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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:26507

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 364 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Vivek Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko And 3 Others

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Amitesh Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶7

Heard Sri Akash Srivastava, Advocate, holding brief of Shri Amitesh Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Anshuman Verma, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the records.

¶8

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.0183 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 87 and 64(1) B.N.S. and Section 5/6 POCSO Act, registered at Police Station Ahirauli, District Ambedkar Nagar.

¶9

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 03.07.2024 against three persons, including the applicant, stating that the applicant had enticed away the informant's daughter aged 14 years on 01.07.2024.

¶10

In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S., she stated that she is aged 15 years, she had gone to the home of her maternal uncle about three years ago where she came into contact with the applicant and since then she used to talk to him. On one occasion, her maternal uncle saw them in a park and thereafter the applicant was beaten up and she was also forbidden from talking to the applicant. After sometime, she again started talking to the applicant and her maternal uncle

¶11

had again beaten him up. Due to this reason, she herself had asked the applicant to take her away to some place but the applicant did not agree for this. She threatened that unless the applicant takes her away with him, she will die. Thereafter, the applicant took her away to Patna and married her.

¶12

The medico legal examination report of the victim contains no mark of injury or sign of use of force but her age has been opined to be 14-15 years.

¶13

In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S., she stated that the applicant had taken her away but she has alleged that the applicant had put a cloth on her face due to which she had fallen unconscious. She has stated that the applicant had married her in a temple.

¶14

In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is a young man aged 19 years having no criminal history and he has been falsely implicated in the present case.

¶15

The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith copies of the materials collected during investigation and a copy of the charge-sheet submitted on 17.12.2024.

¶16

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. wherein she has stated about use of violence against the applicant and that subsequently she has changed her statement coupled with the fact that the applicant is a young man aged 19 years having no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 15.10.2024, whereas the investigation already stands concluded, 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.

¶17

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶18

Let the applicant - Vivek Yadav 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:-

¶19

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

¶20

(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.

¶21

[Subhash Vidyarthi, J.]

¶22

Order Date :- 6.5.2025 MVS/-

¶23

Digitally signed by :- MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Vivek Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vivek Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. 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

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

Sanjay Pal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Sarvesh Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. and 3 Others

Amitabh Kumar Srivastava @ Amitabh Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko

Amitabh Kumar Srivastava @ Amitabh Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Amitabh Kumar Srivastava @ Amitabh Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.