Suryabhan Patel vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39117 of 2025

Suryabhan Patel

Court No. - 64

¶6

HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri N.K. Sharma, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Nikhil Upadhyay, Advocate holding brief of Sri R.S. Dubey, counsel for the informant. Perused the record.

The present bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 203 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 64 B.N.S., Section 5(j)ii/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Tarkulwa, DistrictDeoria during pendency of the trial.

Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The incident is alleged to have occurred on 4.6.2025. The first information report was lodged on 7.6.2025. The delay in lodging the first information report is fatal to the prosecution case. As per the medical report of Chief Medical Officer, Deoria the victim is aged 16 years. It is contended that the range of error in determining the age is about two years and the same should be read in favour of the applicant at this stage. Further, the relevant scientific parameters as per latest medical protocol which would establish the majority of the victim has been excluded from consideration in the medical report. Further the victim in her statement under section 180 B.N.S.S. and 183 B.N.S.S. stated that she had gone voluntarily with the applicant. There is no allegation of any rape or forceful assault against the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 2.8.2025 having no criminal history. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

BAIL No. 39117 of 2025

2

Learned A.G.A. for the State and counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that the delay in lodging the first information report is fatal to the prosecution case. As per the medical report of Chief Medical Officer, Deoria the victim is aged 16 years. The range of error in determining the age is about two years and the same should be read in favour of the applicant at this stage. The victim in her statement under section 180 B.N.S.S. and 183 B.N.S.S. stated that she had gone voluntarily with the applicant. There is no allegation of any rape or forceful assault against the applicant. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Further, the applicant has presently remained confined for more than three months and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

Let the applicant, Suryabhan Patel involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that:

i. the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness;

iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.