Anand Singh @ Chunna Vs State of U.P. through Secretary, Home Department Civil Secretariat, Lucknow

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:48116

Court No. - 12

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7440 of 2025

Applicant :- Anand Singh @ Chunna Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Through Secretary, Home Department Civil Secretariat, Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Devendra Pratap,Saad Husain,Shashank Shekhar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for the complainant, who is permitted to file Vakalatnama in the registry during course of the day.

¶7

The accused–applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 0203 of 2025, under Sections 75(2), 64(1), 79 of the BNS and Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, Police Station Harpalpur, District Hardoi.

¶8

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the victim was in a relationship with the applicant prior to her marriage. It is further alleged that, while continuing to entice the victim even after her marriage, the applicant, by using about ten forged IDs, made obscene photographs and chats of the victim viral.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that, according to the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, she was a consenting party. The sole allegation and the basis for lodging the First Information Report is that the applicant allegedly made obscene photographs of the victim viral. It is submitted that neither the victim nor the complainant has provided any such photograph to the Investigating Officer.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail prayer. However, they could not point out anything from the record to show that any such viral photograph or chat was ever provided by the complainant or the victim to the Investigating Officer.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. submits that the investigation is going on.

¶12

I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record.

¶13

On due consideration to the facts that in the FIR there is no date or year of the incident mentioned by the prosecution; as per the statement of victim the relationship between them is existing since 2019; the applicant has no criminal antecedents; the respondents could not show anything from the record that any corroborative material except the statement of the victim such as photograph video etc. has been handed over by the complainant or to the victim to the Investigating Officer coupled with the fact that the applicant is in jail since 2.7.2025 and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case 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 Anand Singh @ Chunna be released on bail in aforesaid first information report number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below concerned with the following conditions:

¶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

¶20

orders in accordance with law.

¶21

(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 IPC (now Section 269 BNS).

¶22

(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 of the IPC (now Section 209 BNS).

¶23

Order Date :- 18.8.2025 Madhu D.R/P.S

¶24

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Anand Singh @ Chunna v. State of U.P. through Secretary, Home Department Civil Secretariat, Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anand Singh @ Chunna v. State of U.P. through Secretary, Home Department Civil Secretariat, Lucknow

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

Ritesh Mittal and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Shiva Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and 3 Others

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

Nishant Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Maynoor @ Sharukh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Mohd Shadab Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 3 Others