Sandeep vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home at Lucknow and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:47895

Court No. - 65

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9333 of 2025

Applicant :- Sandeep Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Through Secretary Home At Lucknow And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Vinod Kumar Tripathi, Advocate holding brief of Sri Sanjay Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ashwani Kumar Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the material placed on record.

¶8

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 975 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1) of BNS and Section 4(2) of POCSO Act, Police Station - Majhola, District - Moradabad, during the pendency of trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR.

¶10

Learned counsel has also stated that the victim is the consenting party as is evident from her statement recorded u/s 180 & 183 BNSS. The family members of the victim are stated to have agreed to marry the victim elsewhere without her consent and her wouldbe husband is an aged person, as such, she has run away from her house. There is no medical evidence to corroborate the prosecution story. The victim by her looks seems to be major but her age has deliberately been suppressed and shown as 14 years.

¶11

Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is

¶12

languishing in jail since 01.12.2024 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶13

Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶14

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking into consideration the settled law of the Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690 and Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed .

¶15

Let the applicant- Samdeep , who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶16

i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial. ii) The applicant will not pressurise/intimidate with the prosecution witnesses.

¶17

iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶19

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶20

Order Date:- 4.4.2025 Siddhant

¶21

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SIDDHANT SAHU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sandeep v. State of U.P. through Secretary Home at Lucknow and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep v. State of U.P. through Secretary Home at Lucknow 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

Sunil vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Radheyshyam vs State of U.P.

Rohit Kumar vs State of U.P.

Furqan vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sent Jons Alias Sent Kumar vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ramdas vs State of U.P. and 3 Others