Harish vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 4 Others

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 790 of 2026

Harish

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And 4 Others .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dheeraj Awasthi, Shailendra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 13

¶8

HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J.

¶9

Shri Gautam Mishra and Shri Krishna Kant Yadav, have jointly filed their vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party nos. 2 and 3, is taken on record.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the opposite party nos.2 and 3 and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. as well as perused the record.

¶11

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 211 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2) B.N.S and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Mohanganj, DistrictAmethi.

¶12

It is stated that the aforesaid case crime arising out of Case Crime No. 211 of 2024, under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2) B.N.S and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Mohanganj, District-Amethi, pending against the applicant has no force and the applicant having no criminal history is languishing in jail since 22.10.2024.

¶13

In continuation of the above, it is stated that the victim has already been examined before the trial court as P.W.2 and a perusal of the statement of the victim on record, annexed as Annexure No.8, would indicate that she has not supported the story of prosecution before the trial court.

¶14

BAIL No. 790 of 2026

¶15

2

¶16

It is further stated that the informant has also been examined as P.W.1 and the statement of the informant on record, annexed as Annexure No. 7, would also indicate that he has not supported the story of the prosecution.

¶17

It is further stated that the medical opinion does not support the story of the prosecution.

¶18

It is submitted that, considering aforesaid, the applicant, who is in jail since 22.10.2024, is entitled to be released on bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial and would also not influence the prosecution witnesses.

¶19

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the side opposite has opposed the prayer for grant of bail but they could not dispute the above contentions made by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant.

¶20

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, statement(s) of victim and the informant, as also the fact that the medical opinion does not support the prosecution story and also keeping in mind the period of incarceration of the applicant and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

¶21

Let the applicant- Harish be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond to the satisfaction of the court concerned forthwith. Applicant is also directed to furnish two reliable sureties, out of which one shall be the family member of the accused-applicant, each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶22

(i) The applicant shall cooperate with the prosecution during trial.

¶23

(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during trial.

¶24

(iii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witness(s).

¶25

(iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence.

¶26

BAIL No. 790 of 2026

¶27

3

¶28

(v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶29

(vi) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through counsel.

¶30

(vii) The applicant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court.

¶31

(viii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.

¶32

In case of default of above conditions, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law

¶33

As this order relates to enlargement of the applicant on bail, it is clarified that observation(s) made in this order shall have no bearing on the merits of the case and the trial court shall not be influenced by any observation(s) made in this order.

¶34

(Saurabh Lavania,J.)

¶35

February 5, 2026

¶36

Preeti

¶37

Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Harish v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harish v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 4 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

Shiva Ji vs Sri Naveen Khandelwal Presently Posted Divisional Director Social Forestry Division Sitapur

Mohd. Shamim vs Shakil Ahmad

Ritu Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Govind vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Deependra Kumar Singh vs Shri Anil Kumar Mishra Chief Town and Country Planner Lko. Town and Country Planning Deptt. Lko.

Ramesh Kumar Srivastava and Another vs Anil Garg, Secy. Irrigation and Water Resources State of U.P. Lko. and 4 Others