Allowed

Mo. Jaid v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC21 May 2025BAIL/4444/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application in a POCSO and IPC Sections 376(N)/506 case arising from an alleged physical relationship with a young woman under promise of marriage. Court considered the victim's statements indicating she had attained majority, the applicant's age and clean record, investigation being complete, and granted bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Mo. Jaid released on bail on personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions: not tamper with evidence, not pressurise witnesses, appear on every trial date.

Mo. Jaid Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:30052

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4444 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Mo. Jaid Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Dhirendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Dhirendra Pratap Singh, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ashok Srivastava, the learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Praveen Triptahi, learned counsel for the informant.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 77 of 2025, under Sections 376(N), 506 I.P.C. and Section 5L/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, registered at Police Station Jagdeeshpur, District Amethi.

¶8

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of F.I.R. lodged on 20.03.2025, stating that the applicant physically exploiting the informant for the past two years after entangling her in a love affair. Date of birth of the informant is 01.01.2007. She kept on asking the applicant to marry her but the applicant kept on deferring it and ultimately he declined to marry her.

¶9

In the statement of the victim/informant recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S., she stated that she is aged 19 years, she loves the applicant. The applicant used to visit her home for the past two years and he made physical relations with her in the night of 14.03.2025 under allurement of marrying her while her family members were passed asleep. Thereafter, the applicant declined to marry her.

¶10

The medico legal examination report of the victim/informant mentions no mark of injury or sign of use of force. As per educational record, the age of the victim was about 18 years on the date of the incident.

¶11

In the statement of the victim/informant recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S., she stated that she loves the applicant for the past two years. He repetitively made physical relations under allurement of marrying her and when her family members caught them on 14.03.2025, the applicant declined to

¶12

marry her. She further stated that the applicant made physical relations with her on a daily basis inside her home.

¶13

In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is an innocent person, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history.

¶14

As per the arrest memo, the age of the applicant is 19 years.

¶15

The learned A.G.A has opposed the bail application and he has submitted that the allegations have been established during investigation and a charge-sheet has been submitted on 26.04.2025.

¶16

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that although in the F.I.R, the informant has alleged that the applicant made physical relations for the past two years, in the statement of the victim recorded under section 180 B.N.S,S, she specifically stated that the applicant made physical relations in the night of 14.03.2025, when she had already attained the age of majority; 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 21.03.2025 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.

¶17

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed.

¶18

Let the applicant- Mo. Jaid be released on bail in aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to the following conditions: -

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)

¶23

Order Date :- 21.5.2025 Preeti.

¶24

Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mo. Jaid v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mo. Jaid v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. 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

Vinay Kushwaha vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Asif Naseem vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Lko. and Another

Asif Naseem vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Kamlesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Rajendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Dharmraj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.