Afroz Alias Chand Babu vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:57549

Court No. - 65

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4963 of 2025 Applicant :- Afroz Alias Chand Babu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

List has been revised. As informed by learned AGA, notice to the informant has been served on 07.02.2025 but none is present on behalf of the informant.

¶6

Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the material placed on record.

¶7

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 254 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(M) of BNS and Sections 5L/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station - Jaitpura, District - Varanasi, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. Learned counsel has also stated that the victim is the consenting party as is evident from her statement recorded u/s 183 BNSS whereby she has stated that she had gone with the applicant by train all the way to Mumbai. It is argued that the victim has not raised any alarm whatsoever during the said sojourn.

¶9

Learned counsel has further stated that the victim by her looks seems to be major although as per high school certificate, her date of birth is 01.01.2007, as such, her age comes out to be 17 years 10 months and 20 days which is marginally less than the age of majority. Learned counsel has placed much reliance upon the judgement of Supreme Court passed in Sushil Kumar vs. Rakesh Kumar, (2003) 8 SCC 673 , wherein it has been opined that it is more often in the Indian Society that person shows the age of their wards much below than their actual age. In the case of Brij Mohan Singh Vs. Priya Brat Narain Sinha, AIR 1965 SC 282 , this Court, inter alia , observed that in actual life it often happens that persons give false age of the boy at the time of his admission to a school so that later in life he would have an advantage when seeking public service for which a minimum age for eligibility is

¶10

often prescribed.

¶11

Learned counsel has next stated that there is no medical corroboration of the incident. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 24.11.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking into consideration the settled law of the Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690 and Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed .

¶14

Let the applicant- Afroz Alias Chand Babu , who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶15

i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses.

¶16

iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶18

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶19

Order Date:- 18.4.2025/Siddhant

¶20

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶21

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Afroz Alias Chand Babu v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Afroz Alias Chand Babu v. State of U.P. 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Govind Kumar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ankit Gautam vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mohd Kadir vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sanjeet Singh vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sant Kumar vs State of U.P.

Waris vs State of U.P.