Sanjay Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5891 of 2025

¶3

Sanjay Kumar

¶4

.....Applicant(s) Versus

¶5

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mayank Pandey, Ravi Kant Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶6

Court No. - 12

¶7

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

¶8

None appears for the complainant, although the notice to the complainant is served.

¶9

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

¶10

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the minor daughter of the informant aged about 14 years is missing from home since 20.2.2025 at 10.00 am.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the case. In the statements under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, the victim has not supported the prosecution case at all. He submits that the victim has refused to undergo medico legal examination. As per radiological examination, she is stated to be 17-18 years old. She is major. It is submitted that while being examined before the trial court, the PW-1 complainant and the PW-2 victim have been declared hostile. Thus, there is no chance of tampering the prosecution evidence.

¶12

It is further submitted that the applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 9.4.2025. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶13

BAIL No. 5891 of 2025

¶14

2

¶15

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶16

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record, the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, refusal to undergo medico legal examination by the victim so also the fact that while being examined before the trial court, the PW-1 complainant and the PW-2 victim have been declared hostile; there appears to be no chance of tampering the prosecution evidence coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal history; he is languishing in jail since 9.4.2025 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶17

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶18

Let the applicant- Sanjay Kumar involved in Case Crime No. 33 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(1) of B.N.S. & Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Ibrahimpur, District- Ambedkar Nagar, 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,

¶24

BAIL No. 5891 of 2025

¶25

3

¶26

without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶27

(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 B.N.S.S. 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 209 of B.N.S.

¶28

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶29

September 10, 2025 Shravan

¶30

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sanjay Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. 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

Mukesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko.

Rajesh Kumar Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Public Works Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Visheshwar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrett. Lko.

Mohd. Afzal Khan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Brijesh Yadav @ Anil Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Ritik Kannaujiya vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and 3 Others