Disposed¶11

Purshottam Gond v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC12 Feb 2026JAPL/404/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Administrative/listing order in a jail appeal before the Allahabad High Court, Court No. 93; appellant Purshottam Gond represented by Deepesh Kumar Ojha, State of U.P. and others represented by A.G.A.; case listed for 29.07.2026 as prayed; order dated May 13, 2026 signed by Mrs. Vani Ranjan Agrawal, J.; no merits, issues, statutes, precedents or quantum addressed.

What did the court decide?

As prayed, the case was directed to be listed on 29.07.2026; no substantive relief or final disposition of the appeal was made. ¶11

Purshottam Gond vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Allahabad HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

¶2

JAIL APPEAL No. - 404 of 2024

Purshottam Gond

.....Appellant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others

¶7

.....Respondent(s)

¶8

Counsel for Appellant(s)	: Deepesh Kumar Ojha
Counsel for Respondent(s)	: A.G.A.

¶9

Court No. - 93

¶10

HON'BLE MRS. VANI RANJAN AGRAWAL, J.

¶11

Order on Criminal Misc. Suspension of Sentence Application No. 02 of 2024

¶12

This appeal has been preferred against the conviction and sentence recorded vide judgment and order dated 30.01.2024 passed by Special Judge (POCSO ACt), Court Room No.8, Ballia in Session Case No.1199/2023, arising out of Case Crime No.341/2023, under Sections 354 and 323 I.P.C., and Section 9N/10 POCSO Act, Police Station- Nagra, District- Ballia.

¶13

Heard learned Counsel for the appellant-applicant as well as the learned AGA for the State.

¶14

By means of this application, the appellant-applicant seeks suspension of sentence and grant of bail.

¶15

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the appellant-applicant that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated. It has been further submitted that the conviction and sentence imposed by the learned trial court is against the weight of evidence on record. The trial court has misread the evidence on record and convicted the appellant. The prosecution has not been able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. It has further been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 30.01.2024. It has been further submitted that the appellant was also in jail during the trial. Since there is no likelihood of early hearing of the appeal in near future, the appellant may be released on bail during the pendency of this appeal. Besides the above submissions, learned counsel for the appellant has also tried to touch upon at length the circumstances which led to the false implication of accused - appellant.

¶16

JAPL No. 404 of 2024

¶17

¶18

On the other hand learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the accused appellant is the father of the victim. It has further been submitted that the first information was lodged by the victim herself alleging the molestation by her father. It has further been submitted that at the time of incident, the victim was aged about 14 years old. It has also been submitted that prior to the present first information report, P.W.-2 had lodged a first information report against the accused appellant with regard to molestation, being Crime No.33/2022, under Sections 354 and 323 I.P.C.

¶19

I have considered the rival submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record including the impugned judgment.

¶20

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, sentence awarded to the appellant, the evidence available on record and the findings recorded by the trial court thereon and considering the facts that the accused appellant is the father of the victim, the first information was lodged by the victim herself alleging the molestation by her father, at the time of incident, the victim was aged about 14 years old, and prior to the present first information report, P.W.-2 had lodged a first information report against the accused appellant with regard to molestation, being Crime No.33/2022, under Sections 354 and 323 I.P.C., without further commenting on the merits of the case, I am not inclined to release the appellant/applicant on bail.

¶21

Accordingly, the bail application of the appellant- Purshottam Gond is, rejected .

¶22

Order on Appeal:-

¶23

Admit.

¶24

Let trial court record be summoned.

¶25

Office is directed prepare the paper book after receipt of the record.

¶26

List this matter before appropriate Bench after three months.

¶27

February 12, 2026 Pravesh Mishra

¶28

(Mrs. Vani Ranjan Agrawal,J.)

¶29

Digitally signed by :- PRAVESH KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Purshottam Gond v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Purshottam Gond v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Smt. Sangeeta Jaiswal vs Sri Jogendra Kumar, Commissioner of Police, Commissionerate and Another

M/S Printvell Printers Private Limited vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Nazim Husain vs State of U.P. and Another

Omprakash Pal vs Krishn Swaroop

Gaurav @ Jitendra Kumar and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashok Kumar vs State of U.P. and 2 Others