Pramod Yadav Alias Bauna vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:44608

Court No. - 65

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9382 of 2025

Applicant :- Pramod Yadav Alias Bauna Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Radhey Shyam Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record. Learned State Law Officer has informed that notice to the informant has been served on 12.3.2025.

¶8

Heard Sri Radhey Shyam Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Ifrah Islam, learned State Law Officer and perused the material placed on record.

¶9

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.135 of 2023, under Sections 363, 376, 504 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police StationKampil, District- Farrukhabad, during the pendency of trial.

¶10

As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have enticed away the victim in collusion with co-accused person on 5.7.2023.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by about two days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The victim is a consenting party as is but evident from the circumstances as she is stated to have gone with the applicant in a car and has not raised any alarm whatsoever. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. The victim by her looks seems to be major, although she is stated to be 17 years and 11 months old as per the school certificate.

¶12

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.

¶13

The criminal history of one case assigned to the applicant has been explained. The applicant is languishing in jail since 25.7.2023 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶15

The Supreme Court in Prabhakar Tewari Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2020 (11) SCC 648 has observed that pendency of several criminal cases against an accused itself cannot be a basis for refusal of bail, if otherwise his case of bail is made out.

¶16

In light of the judgement of the Supreme Court passed in Niranjan Singh and another vs Prabhakar Rajaram Kharote and others AIR 1980 SC 785, this Court has avoided detailed examination of the evidence and elaborate documentation of the merits of the case as no party should have the impression that his case has been prejudiced. A prima facie satisfaction of case is needed but it is not the same as an exhaustive exploration of the merits in the order itself.

¶17

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 .

¶18

Let the applicant- Pramod Yadav Alias Bauna , 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.

¶19

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.

¶20

(ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶21

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a

¶22

ground for cancellation of bail.

¶23

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.

¶24

Order Date :- 1.4.2025 Vikas

¶25

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶26

Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pramod Yadav Alias Bauna v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramod Yadav Alias Bauna v. State of U.P. 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

Lalji Gond vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Chandan Chauhan vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mohd. Rashid Husain vs State of U.P.

Sheshman Urf Ganesh Yadav vs State of U.P.

Waseem Malik vs State of U.P.

Abhishek Yadav vs State of U.P. and 3 Others