Saurabh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20595 of 2025

Saurabh

.....Applicant(s)

	Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others		...	..Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Prabha Chauhan, : Anand Pa	Shanker Bharti, Saurabh Chaturvedi ti Tiwari, G.A.	Pradeep

¶5

Court No. - 70

¶6

HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J.

¶7

Heard I.K. Chaturvedi, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri Saurabh Chaturvedi for the applicant, Sri Anand Pati Tiwari, learned counsel first informant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶8

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 81 of 2025, under Sections 115(2), 351(3), 352 of B.N.S. and Section 5M(L)/6 POCSO Act, P.S. Jevar, District Gautam Budh Nagar, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case due to enmity. It is further submitted that the alleged incident is said to have happened in the house of Mausi of the accused-applicant. The co-accused Maisi @ Mayank was declared juvenile and he is facing trial before the Juvenile Justice Board. It is further submitted that the applicant is a married persons having a baby child. It is further submitted that for the first time, the boy (victim) was medically treated on 3.3.2025 in the hospital and the said medical examination has been entered by the I.O. in the case diary. It is further submitted that there was no allegation regarding sexual assault committed with the boy (victim) aged about 12 years. After moving the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. by the grand-father of the victim, the accused - applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He lastly submitted that the applicant, who is in jail, since 26.6.2025 and has no criminal antecedents to his discredit, is entitled to be enlarged on bail during pendency of the trial.

¶10

BAIL No. 20595 of 2025

¶11

2

¶12

Learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel for the first informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant has criminal history, while it has been stated in the affidavit (para026) memo of the bail application that the applicant has no criminal history. The statement of the victim was recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. and 183 B.N.S.S. and in those statements, the victim has supported the prosecution version. Learned AGA for the State further submits that, the applicant has not shown any bona fide by not disclosing the fact of criminal cases pending against him and then did not follow the procedure, as prescribed in para 3 of the Allahabad High Court (Amendment) Rules, 2025, published vide publication in Extraordinary Gazette of State of Uttar Pradesh, vide Notification dated 12.11.2025, and the procedure prescribed therein para 3 is as under:-

¶13

"3. Insertion of sub-Rule (7) in Rule 18 of Chapter XVIII.- In Rule 18 of Chapter XVIII of the Rules, the following sub-Rule (7) shall be inserted after sub-Rule (6) :

¶14

(7) Every application for bail filed before this Court shall also disclose-

¶15

(a) Particulars of any bail application filed by the applicant which is pending before this Court, any subordinate Court, or the Supreme Court, and if none is pending, a clear statement to that effect, together with the result of any such application previously decided along with copy of the order (s);

¶16

(b) Whether the applicant is or was involved in any other criminal case, and if so, the particulars and decisions thereof."

¶17

The Statement of the victim aged about 12 years was recorded before the learned Magistrate, wherein the child has stated that, he was forced to smoke biri and a video film was also made, while smoking biri and was sexually abused twice-thrice by the accused, namely, Saurabh. As per the statement of the victim, the incident has been narrated and instances of sexual abusing have been repeated by the said accused and the witness stated, that the child was treated in Base Hospital, Delhi wherein he developed piles and is further undergoing treatment in the hospital.

¶18

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the

¶19

BAIL No. 20595 of 2025

¶20

3

¶21

accused, severity of the punishment, and suppression of criminal history of the accused and submissions of learned counsel for the parties and considering that statement of the victim and witnesses, the accusedapplicant, Saurabh, is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶22

7. The bail application is rejected.

¶23

April 8, 2026 Kumar Manish

¶24

(Harvir Singh,J.)

¶25

Digitally signed by :- MANISH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Saurabh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saurabh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunil Yadav vs State of U.P.

Rakesh Prajapati vs Narcotics Control Bureau and Another

Malti Devi vs State of U.P.

Raj Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Dubey @ Abhay vs State of U.P.

Panne Lal vs State of U.P.