Allowed

Ranjeet @ Ram Narayan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4 Others

Allahabad HC2 Jun 2025BAIL/4795/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application by the accused in a POCSO case involving Sections 363/366/376AB IPC. The court noted the victim's ossification test indicating age 18–19 years, her statements under Sections 180/183 BNSS not supporting prosecution, custody since April 2025, and explained criminal antecedent. Bail was granted with conditions against tampering, intimidation, and misuse of liberty.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions regarding non-tampering, no witness intimidation, attendance at trial, and consequences for default or mi

Ranjeet @ Ram Narayan Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:34242

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4795 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Ranjeet @ Ram Narayan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 4 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

(Order on Correction/Amendment Application)

¶7

This is the application for correction/amendment in the memo of bail application.

¶8

On due consideration of the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the application for correction/amendment, the application for correction/amendment is allowed.

¶9

Accordingly, learned counsel for the applicant is permitted to carry out necesary correction/amendment in the memo of bail application during course of the day.

¶10

(Order on Bail Application)

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the case. According to the ossification test conducted by the Chief Medical Officer, Gonda, the age of the victim is estimated to be between 18-19 years. The victim, in her statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 of the BNSS, has not supported the prosecution case. The applicant has explained his criminal antecedent of one case.

¶13

It is further submitted that there is no likelihood of the applicant

¶14

absconding or tampering with the prosecution witnesses if he is released on bail. The applicant undertakes not to misuse the liberty of bail, if granted.

¶15

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application and has submitted that the victim is pregnant.

¶16

On due consideration to the victim’s statements recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, the ossification test report indicating the victim’s age to be 18–19 years, the fact that the applicant is in custody since 04.04.2025, and he has explained his criminal antecedent of one case, and without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the view that this is a fit case for granting bail to the applicant.

¶17

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶18

Let the applicant Ranjeet @ Ram Narayan involved in Case Crime No. 54/2025, under Sections 363/366/376AB IPC and Section 5(j)(ii),(I),(m)/6 POCSO Act, Police Station - Kotwali Nagar, District - Bahraich, be released on bail on his 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 imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶19

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶20

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶21

(iii) 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.

¶22

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶23

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶24

(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶25

Order Date :- 2.6.2025 R.C.

¶26

Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ranjeet @ Ram Narayan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjeet @ Ram Narayan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 4 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

Mohd. Rashid Vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry Information and Technology New Delhi and 5 Others

Pradeep Nath Sharma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Irrigation U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Pooja Saroj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Bal Vikas Evam Pustahar Vibhag, Lko. and 6 Others

Vipin vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Man Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow and 3 Others

Ashraf vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. of U.P. Lko. and 3 Others