Anil @ Surya 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. - 9246 of 2025

Anil @ Surya

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Alok Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 12

¶8

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA for the State. None appears on behalf of the complainant, although, as per the instructions of learned AGA, notice to the complainant is served.

¶10

It is alleged in the prosecution case that the minor daughter of the informant, aged about 16 years, was enticed away by the applicant on 03.06.2025.

¶11

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the victim, of her own accord, went with the applicant to Ludhiana, where she met him and stayed with him for nine days. In her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS, the victim did not make any allegation of rape or sexual relationship. She has stated that she went willingly, married the applicant in Ludhiana, and stayed with him for several days without raising any objection or alarm. The victim has attained the age of discretion and has declared herself to be 16 years old. No ossification test was conducted by the investigating officer for the reasons best known to him. The medico-legal examination also does not provide any corroborative medical evidence, as no internal or external injuries were found on the victim. The applicant, who has no criminal antecedents, is languishing in jail since 14.06.2025.

¶12

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case

¶13

BAIL No. 9246 of 2025

¶14

2

¶15

the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶16

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.

¶17

On due consideration of the facts that the victim of her own accord went away and stayed with the applicant without raising any alarm; in her statement under Section 183 BNSS, she has not made any allegation against the applicant; there lack of corroborative medical evidence in support of the prosecution case; no ossification test was conducted and the applicant is in custody since 14.06.2025 without any criminal antecedents, I am of the opinion that this is a fit case for granting bail to the applicant.

¶18

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶19

Let the applicant Anil @ Surya involved in Case Crime No. 0097/2025, Under Section-137 (2), 87, 65 (1) of B.N.S. Act, 2023 & Section-5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station-Nasirabad, District-Raebareli, 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:-

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

(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.

¶23

(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.

¶24

(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,

¶25

BAIL No. 9246 of 2025

¶26

3

¶27

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

¶28

(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).

¶29

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.

¶30

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶31

September 24, 2025 R.C.

¶32

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

Anil @ Surya 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?

Anil @ Surya 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

Shiv Bhavan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

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

Shivam Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko.

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

Suspier vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Ram Naresh Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Cooperative Lko. and 6 Others