Dhanai Nishad @ Dhani Ram vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

The captioned criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant/applicant challenging therein, the judgment and order dated 23.09.2025 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (P.O.C.S.O. Act), Gonda, in Special Sessions Trial No.150 of 2019, State vs. Dhanai Nishad, arising out of Crime No.223 of 2017, registered under Sections 377, 323, 511 I.P.C. and Sections 7/8 and 4/18, P.O.C.S.O. Act, Police Station-Nawabganj, District-Gonda, whereby the appellant/applicant had been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 377 read with Section 511 I.P.C. and Section 4/18 POCSO Act and had been sentenced for imprisonment of seven years.

¶19

It has been contended on behalf of the appellant/applicant that an F.I.R. was lodged by the wife of the appellant on 30.06.2016 against the father of the victim. It has further been contended that in counter-blast to the aforesaid F.I.R., the father of the victim had lodged the criminal case subject matter of this criminal appeal, that too, with the delay of 16 days.

¶20

CRLA No. 3404 of 2025

¶21

2

¶22

Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that the medical report available in the trial court's judgment in noway suggests any kind of offence punishable under Section 377 I.P.C. It has further been submitted that even the doctor, who was examined by the trial court had categorically stated that all the injuries caused to victim could have come by other means.

¶23

Learned counsel appearing for the appellant/applicant has submitted that the appellant/applicant during trial was on bail and has never misused the liberty of bail.

¶24

Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State has opposed the prayer for grant of bail.

¶25

I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and I find that the appellant/applicant lodged a criminal case against the father of the victim on 30.06.2016 and thereafter the criminal case, subject matter of this criminal appeal, had been lodged. I further find that the nature of injuries sustained by the victim and the doctor's opinion available in the record of the trial court do not suggest any offence punishable under Section 377 I.P.C. This Court also finds that the appellant/applicant was on bail during trial and has not misused the liberty of bail and the final disposal of this criminal appeal is likely to take some time, therefore, it is in the interest of justice that during pendency of the criminal appeal the appellant/applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶26

Having considered the overall facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that the appellant/applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during pendency of this criminal appeal.

¶27

Accordingly, the trial court/competent court is hereby direct to enlarge the appellant/applicant (Dhanai Nishad @ Dhani Ram), on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing two sureties and a personal bond to its satisfaction with the following conditions:-

¶28

i. The fine imposed by the trial court shall be deposited by the appellant/applicant within a period of two month from his actual release from prison, if the same is not earlier deposited.

¶29

ii. The appellant/applicant shall cooperate in early disposal of the appeal without seeking unnecessary adjournments.

¶30

iii. The appellant/applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on

¶31

CRLA No. 3404 of 2025

¶32

3

¶33

bail.

¶34

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

¶35

On acceptance of the bail bonds and the personal bond, the court concerned shall transmit the photocopies thereof to this Court for being kept on the record.

¶36

(Manjive Shukla,J.)

¶37

October 17, 2025

¶38

akhilesh/-

¶39

Digitally signed by :- AKHILESHWAR KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Dhanai Nishad @ Dhani Ram v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhanai Nishad @ Dhani Ram v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 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

Similar cases

Satyendra Kumar Shukla vs Addl. Principal Judge Family Court, District Lucknow and 2 Others

Rashid Malik vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Shyam Karan Dubey vs Seema and 2 Others

Shiv Kumar @ Khadail vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin./Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Ramgopal vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Ram Prakash Sharma @ Rinku Sharma and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Another