Gurpindar Singh @ Pindar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and Shri Amit Bhatt, learned Advocate holding brief of Shri Amit Kumar Awasthi, learned counsel for the complainant.

¶12

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶13

According to the prosecution case, it is alleged that on the intervening night of 4/5.10.2025, the applicant enticed away the minor daughter of the informant, who is stated to be about 17 years of age. It is further alleged that while leaving the house, the said minor took with her a sum of Rs.13,000/-, three gold rings, and one gold locket.

¶14

Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the victim, while giving her statements under Sections 180 and 183 of the BNSS, has not supported the prosecution version. It is contended that the victim was a consenting party and had voluntarily left her parental home of her own free will. Learned counsel further submits that no allegation of inducement or coercion has been levelled against the applicant in the statements of the victim. It is also urged that the victim has made material improvements while giving her statement under Section 183 BNSS, which renders the prosecution case doubtful.

¶15

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing

¶16

BAIL No. 12754 of 2025

¶17

2

¶18

away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶19

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.

¶20

Upon due consideration of the aforesaid submissions, the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, he is in judicial custody since 18.10.2025, and having carefully perused the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶21

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶22

Let the applicant Gurpindar Singh @ Pindar , involved in Case Crime No. 409/2025, U/s-87, 137(2), B.N.S., (Old Section 366/363 I.P.C.), Police Station-Mailani, District-Lakhimpur Kheri, be released on bail in the aforementioned case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶23

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶24

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶25

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial Court.

¶26

Any other condition(s) which the trial court/concerned court may deem fit and proper, in the circumstances of the case, may also be imposed.

¶27

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.

¶28

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶29

January 19, 2026 R.C.

¶30

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

Gurpindar Singh @ Pindar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurpindar Singh @ Pindar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

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

Sachin Kumar (Services No 255371009) vs Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry Home Affairs Govt. New Delhi and 3 Others

Nikhil Panwar vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and 4 Others

Smt. Akanksha Shukla vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Bal Vikas Evam Pustahar Lko. and 5 Others

Sanjay Shukla @ Sanjay Kumar and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Affairs Lko.

Rajendra Kumar Verma @ Rajendra Verma @ Raju vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Affairs Lko.

Krishan Gopal Swarnkar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Addl. Chief Home Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another