High Court · 2025

1. Heard Mr. Ray Sahab Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Sanjay Mishra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State of U.P. as well as perused the record.

2. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.65 of 2024, under Sections 363, 366, 376-DA I.P.C. and Section 3/4(2) POCSO Act, Police Station- Chaubiya, District- Etawah with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

3. As per FIR, minor daughter of the informant has been enticed away by the applicant on the pretext of marriage along with Rs.20,000/- and some jewelry.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case. The applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. He submits that the incident took place on 2.5.2024 whereas the FIR has been lodged after due deliberation and consultation on 4.5.2024 but no plausible explanation regarding delay has been mentioned. He submits that initially, the impugned FIR was lodged under Sections 363, 366 IPC and after recovery of the victim on 4.5.2024 and as per her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., Section 376-DA I.P.C. and Section 3/4(2) POCSO Act were added. He submits that as per FIR, victim is aged about 14 years and as per school certificate of 8th, she is aged about 15 years 6 months and as per statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C, she is aged about 15 years. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the victim has been falsely shown as minor only to aggravate the offence and cause the imprisonment of the applicant under the stringent provisions of the POCSO Act. The victim is infact a major. Medical examination to determine the correct age of the victim was not got done as it would falsify the prosecution case. He further submits that the victim has never made alarm at any point of time, which creates serious doubt on the prosecution story. As per medical examination, there is no injury internal or external injury found on the body of the victim. He further submits that there are major contradiction in the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C.. There is no direct and credible evidence or eye witnesses against the applicant in the involvement of the case. He further submits that co-accused, Raju has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 22.11.2024 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.28160 of 2024, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 6.5.2024 having no criminal history.

5. Learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail but could not disputed the above contention made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

6. 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, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

7. Let the applicant- Boby Nagar, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against her under Section 229-A IPC. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case. (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. (v) The Trial Court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial within a period of one year after the release of the applicant.

8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

9. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

10. With the above observation/direction, the instant bail application is allowed. KRISHNA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Order Date :- 13.2.2025 Krishna*

1. Heard Mr. Ray Sahab Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Sanjay Mishra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State of U.P. as well as perused the record.

2. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.65 of 2024, under Sections 363, 366, 376-DA I.P.C. and Section 3/4(2) POCSO Act, Police Station- Chaubiya, District- Etawah with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

3. As per FIR, minor daughter of the informant has been enticed away by the applicant on the pretext of marriage along with Rs.20,000/- and some jewelry.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case. The applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. He submits that the incident took place on 2.5.2024 whereas the FIR has been lodged after due deliberation and consultation on 4.5.2024 but no plausible explanation regarding delay has been mentioned. He submits that initially, the impugned FIR was lodged under Sections 363, 366 IPC and after recovery of the victim on 4.5.2024 and as per her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., Section 376-DA I.P.C. and Section 3/4(2) POCSO Act were added. He submits that as per FIR, victim is aged about 14 years and as per school certificate of 8th, she is aged about 15 years 6 months and as per statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C, she is aged about 15 years. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the victim has been falsely shown as minor only to aggravate the offence and cause the imprisonment of the applicant under the stringent provisions of the POCSO Act. The victim is infact a major. Medical examination to determine the correct age of the victim was not got done as it would falsify the prosecution case. He further submits that the victim has never made alarm at any point of time, which creates serious doubt on the prosecution story. As per medical examination, there is no injury internal or external injury found on the body of the victim. He further submits that there are major contradiction in the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C.. There is no direct and credible evidence or eye witnesses against the applicant in the involvement of the case. He further submits that co-accused, Raju has already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 22.11.2024 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.28160 of 2024, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 6.5.2024 having no criminal history.

5. Learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail but could not disputed the above contention made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

6. 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, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

7. Let the applicant- Boby Nagar, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified. (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against her under Section 229-A IPC. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case. (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. (v) The Trial Court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial within a period of one year after the release of the applicant.

8. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

9. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

10. With the above observation/direction, the instant bail application is allowed. KRISHNA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Order Date :- 13.2.2025 Krishna*