Durgesh Vs State of U.P.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:35641

Court No. - 64

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3922 of 2025

Applicant :- Durgesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Jaiswal,Vivekanand Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and perused the record.

¶7

By means of this application under Section 483 of BNSS, applicant Durgesh, who is involved in Case Crime No. 819 of 2024, under Sections 69 of BNS, police station Campierganj, district Gorakhpur seeks enlargement on bail during the pendency of trial.

¶8

As per prosecution case, in brief, complainant, who is father of the victim, lodged a first information report on 11.12.2024 against the applicant making allegation inter alia that on 09.12.2024, his minor daughter aged about 16 years was enticed away by the applicant. F.I.R. also alleges that earlier a month ago, the applicant had enticed away his daughter but after four days, he left her near the village. Since no F.I.R. was lodged regarding the said incident, therefore, he has again committed the same incident.

¶9

Main substratum of arguments of learned counsel for the applicant is that complainant in order to enhance the gravity of offence deliberately mentioned in the F.I.R. that victim is a minor girl whereas she is major aged about 18 years. The victim in her statements under Section 180 and 183 of BNSS has clearly stated that on account of her love affair with the applicant for the last four years, she had gone to Amritsar on her own where the applicant was residing and physical relation between them was made with their own consent. On the strength of statements of the victim, it is also argued that it is

¶10

not a case of rape but a case of consensual relation between the parties concerned. It is also pointed out that the victim has refused for her internal medical examination and as such, there is no corroborative material on record to presume that the applicant has committed rape on the victim. The Investigating Officer has not conducted fair investigation and submitted charge-sheet in arbitrary manner. The applicant does not have any criminal history to his credit. Lastly, it is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no chance of the applicant fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is languishing in jail since 07.01.2025 and in case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and cooperate with the trial.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant but does not dispute the above factual aspect of the matter as argued on behalf of the applicant.

¶12

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that it is not in dispute that the victim has refused for her internal and external medical examination. The victim is major and her statements show that she was inclined towards the applicant and on account of love and affection, she herself went to Amritsar to meet the applicant, which shows that she was consenting with the applicant.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed .

¶14

Let the applicant Durgesh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions, which are being

¶15

imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶16

(i) That the applicant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable.

¶17

(ii) That 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.

¶18

(iii) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity.

¶19

(iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶21

Order Date :- 11.3.2025 Shubham

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SHUBHAM KUMAR AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Durgesh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Durgesh v. State of U.P.

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