Sachin Kumar Vs State of U.P.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9231 of 2026

Sachin Kumar

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State of U.P. .....Opposite Party(s) Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sita Ram, Vinod Kr Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Yash Pratap Singh Court No. - 70

¶7

HON'BLE HARVIR SINGH, J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Birendra Singh, learned counsel for informant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶9

This bail application has been moved on behalf of the accused-applicant for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 06 of 2026, under Sections 137 (2) and 87 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Police Station Khakhreru, District Fatehpur, during pendency of trial.

¶10

Briefly stated, as per the allegations levelled and the incident narrated in the FIR, which was lodged by the mother of the victim against the applican, alleging that the victim was enticed away by the applicant on 6.1.2026, at about 8.00 PM, when her daughter had gone to ease herself.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. In the F. I. R. allegation of enticing away was conspicuous against the applicant. He next submitted that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 180 B.N.S.S. has stated that she was in touch with the applicant for the last one year and on 6.1.2026 at about 8.00 PM, she along with Sachin (applicant), proceeded for Delhi, but she was intercepted by the police on the way. However in her statement recorded under Section 183 B. N. S. S., she changed her version and came up with the story that her age is 13 years and she is studying in Class-VIII and when she had gone to ease herself, the applicant, who was hidden somewhere, came over there and covered her mouth with a handkerchief and kidnapped her, saying that he will marry her. In the statement of the doctor, who had conducted medical examination of the victim, she stated that no external mark of injury was found over the body of the victim. He also submitted that

¶12

BAIL No. 9231 of 2026

¶13

2

¶14

no explanation is forthcoming regarding the variance of the facts stated by her in her statement recorded under Sections 180 and 183 B. N. S. S., hence the applicant, who has no criminal antecedents and is in jail since 09.1.2026, is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶15

Per contra, learned counsel for informant and learned AGA have opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the applicant is accused of having abducted a minor girl.

¶16

Having considered the rival contentions of the parties, nature of offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, and the fact that there is variance of the facts narrated in the first information report and statements of the victim recorded under Sections 180 and 183 B.N.S. S., therefore, the applicant has made out a case for being enlarged on bail.

¶17

In the light of discussions made above but without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶18

Let the applicant Sachin 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:-

¶19

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

¶20

(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.

¶21

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

¶22

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.

¶23

Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the Court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶24

April 20, 2026 HR

¶25

(Harvir Singh,J.)

¶26

Digitally signed by :- HEMANT RANJAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sachin Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sachin Kumar v. State of U.P.

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

Manish Kumar Yadav and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanni vs State of U.P.

Bajarangi Chauhan vs State of U.P.

Jay Bharat Bhai Thakkar Vs State of U.P.

Ankit Vs State of U.P.

Nitish Kumar Singh @ Mohan Singh Vs State of U.P.