Pawan Kumar Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. (Home) and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:15861

Court No. - 15

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 524 of 2025

Applicant :- Pawan Kumar Vishwakarma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. (Home) And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Nalin Arora,Anubhav Singh,Vrishank Pathak

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶7

Heard Sri Nalin Arora, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajiv Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the records.

¶8

On 05.02.2024 time was granted to the learned A.G.A. for filing a counter affidavit but no counter affidavit has been filed till date.

¶9

No one has put in appearance on behalf of the informant to oppose the bail application. In these circumstances the court proceeds to decide the bail application on its merits.

¶10

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 0490 of 2024, under Sections 70 (2)/123/127(2) B.N.S. and Section 5(g)/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered at Police Station Chinhat, District Lucknow.

¶11

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 14.10.2024 against unknown persons stating that the informant's sister aged about 13 years had gone to attend the call of nature in the fields at about 4.00 a.m. on 14.10.2024 but she did not come back. She was found with her neck and legs tied with dupatta in Deoria Society in an

¶12

unconscious condition. The informant stated that she apprehends that some misdeed had been committed against her sister.

¶13

In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 180 BNSS, she stated that she used to talk to the applicant Pawan for the past six months. Her elder sister Komal had seen her talking to Pawan on 06.10.2024 and had threatened that in case the victim repeats it, she would tell it to her parents. Thereafter, Pawan gave her another phone and she used to talk to him. She had called the applicant at 03.20 Hrs. on 14.10.2024 and asked him to meet her at the orphanage and she had gone to meet him. They had gone to the house of the co-accused Vishal but her mother and sister came nearby looking for her. Pawan said that he would talk to her parents for their marriage but she stated that they will not agree and she said that Pawan should tie her hands and legs. She stated that Pawan did not commit any misdeed against her. No sign of use of force and mark of injury has been reported in the medico legal examination report of the victim. Although, the doctor stated that sexual violence cannot be ruled out. In her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS she narrated an altogether different story and even in it she did not allege commission of rape.

¶14

In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application it has been stated that the applicant is a 19 years old innocent person, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history.

¶15

The learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and he has submitted that the victim is a minor girl aged about 13 years, two months and the doctor opined that sexual violence cannot be ruled out.

¶16

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that neither the F.I.R. nor any of the statements of the victim alleged commission of rape; that there is major discrepancy in the statements of the victim recorded by the Investigating Officer and by the Magistrate; that the medico legal examination report does not indicate any use of force against the victim; that the applicant is a young man having no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 17.10.2024 and without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime.

¶17

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶18

Let the applicant-Pawan Kumar Vishwakarma be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to 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, unless his appearance is exempted by the learned trial court.

¶22

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

¶23

Order Date :- 19.3.2025 Ram.

¶24

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

Pawan Kumar Vishwakarma v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. (Home) and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pawan Kumar Vishwakarma v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. (Home) 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Gulfan Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. and 3 Others

Surajpal Vs State of U.P. Thru Principal Sec. Home and Another

Shivbalak Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy.Home Lko.

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

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

Asutosh Singh @ Singh Asutosh Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy Home Lko.