Wahid @ Popla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:46468

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7393 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Wahid @ Popla Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 3 Others

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Rohit Kumar Verma,Faizal Hashmi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶7

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

¶8

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 07.04.2025 around 7:00 pm, while the victim was coming back after relieving herself, the applicant Wahid @ Popla, a resident of the same village, allegedly molested her. When an alarm was raised, he fled while issuing threats.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim reiterated the prosecution version in her statement under Section 180 BNSS, as mentioned in the FIR. However, in her statement under Section 183 BNSS, she made improvement introducing an allegation of rape for the first time. In the medico-legal examination of the victim, no injury has been found. It has been further submitted that margin of error in ascertaining age by radiological examination is two years on either side as held by Supreme Court in Jaya Mala versus Home Secretary, Government of Jammu & Kashmir and others (1982)2 SCC 538 and the applicant being the accused is entitled for giving the benefit on higher side. The applicant is in jail since 21.04.2025 with no prior criminal record.

¶10

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or

¶11

tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

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

¶13

Upon careful consideration of the inconsistencies in the victim’s subsequent statement under Section 183 BNSS, the absence of corroborative evidence and in light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Jaya Mala (supra) , along with the fact that the charge sheet has been filed and the applicant is in custody since 21.04.2025 with no criminal history, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶14

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶15

Let the applicant Wahid @ Popla involved in Case Crime No.89/2025, under Section- 74, 351(3), 352, 64(1) B.N.S & section 7/8, 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station- Rupaidiha, DistrictBahraich. 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:-

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

(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.

¶19

(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.

¶20

(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 in accordance with law.

¶21

(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. (now Section 84 BNSS) 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 IPC (now Section 209 of BNS).

¶22

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial. Order Date :- 8.8.2025

¶23

R.C.

¶24

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

Wahid @ Popla 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?

Wahid @ Popla 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

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

Vipul Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Nisar Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt.

Karan and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Sajan @ Ram Sanehi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Pravesh Kumar Yadav vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.