Nitesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27898 of 2025

¶3

Nitesh Kumar

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) :	Shreesh Bahadur Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :	G.A.
Court No.- 66

¶6

HON'BLE SAMEER JAIN, J.

¶7

Sri Imran Khan, learned AGA apprised the Court that notice has been served upon informant on 18.08.2025. Despite service of notice, none present on behalf of informant.

¶8

Heard Sri Shreesh Bahadur Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Imran Khan, learned AGA for the State.

¶9

The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 407 of 2023, under Sections 376AB, 506 IPC and Section 5m/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Teelamodh, District Ghaziabad during pendency of the trial.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits, however, this is second bail application filed on behalf of applicant and first bail application of the applicant was dismissed by this Court vide order dated 20.11.2023 but he is pressing the instant second bail application mainly on the ground that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 30.06.2023 i.e. for last more than two and half years and statement of victim has already been recorded by the trial court, therefore, even there is no chance of tampering with the prosecution evidence if applicant is enlarged on bail.

¶11

He further submits, even allegation against applicant is of sexual assault and there is no allegation of penetrative sexual assault and on the basis of such allegation it is easy to implicate anyone. He further submits, on the date of incident victim was aged about two years, therefore, it appears, on the instigation of her parents she started making allegation against applicant.

¶12

BAIL No. 27898 of 2025

¶13

2

¶14

He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history.

¶15

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits, this is second bail application filed on behalf of applicant and as per allegation applicant made sexual assault upon two years old girl and she also stated against applicant but could not dispute the fact that applicant is in jail in the present matter since 30.06.2023 i.e. for last more than two and half years and victim has already been examined by the trial court. Learned AGA further could not dispute the fact that applicant is not having any criminal history.

¶16

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶17

However, this is second bail application filed on behalf of applicant and first bail application of the applicant has been dismissed by this Court vide order dated 20.11.2023 after considering the fact that as per allegation he made sexual assault upon two years female child but it reflects, he is in jail since 30.06.2023 i.e. for last more than two and half years and till date trial of the case could not be concluded. Considering the pace of the trial there is no hope of early disposal of trial and there is no evidence that applicant is responsible for delay in trial.

¶18

Further, victim of the case has already been examined by the trial court, therefore, this Court finds merit in the argument advanced by learned counsel for applicant that if applicant is enlarged on bail then also there is no chance of tampering with the prosecution evidence.

¶19

Further, even there is allegation of sexual assault against the applicant and there is no allegation of penetrative sexual assault.

¶20

Further, applicant is not having any criminal history.

¶21

Further, law is settled that unless proven guilty an accused is deemed to be innocent and bail application should not be dismissed either for punitive or preventive purpose.

¶22

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶23

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶24

BAIL No. 27898 of 2025

¶25

3

¶26

Let the applicant - Nitesh Kumar be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶27

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶28

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶29

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶30

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶31

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶32

April 2, 2026 AK Pandey

¶33

(Sameer Jain,J.)

¶34

Digitally signed by :- ANUPAM KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Nitesh Kumar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nitesh Kumar 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Munna Khan @ Fateh Mohammad Abbas vs State of U.P. and Another

Sonu Kumar vs State of U.P.

Karan Saxena @ Karan Singh vs State of U.P.

Vishal Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Kapil Chauhan vs State of U.P.

Balkishan Badkareya Khatik vs State of U.P.