Allahabad High Court
BAIL/12641/2025 of VINAY KUMAR Vs THE STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND 3 OTHERS on 19 December 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12641 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record. Despite service of notice, no one appeared on behalf of the complainant. 2.
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12641 of 2025
Court No. - 12
HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J.
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record. Despite service of notice, no one appeared on behalf of the complainant.
2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.123 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 87, 65(1), 74 of BNS and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Shivratanganj, District Amethi.
3. In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that the daughter of the informant was enticed by the applicant. Subsequently, in the statement under Section 180 of BNSS, the victim stated she knew the applicant for the last one year and was in love with him. In the statement under Section 183 of BNSS, the victim stated that the applicant had refused to marry with her and all the other versions were reiterated. The tentative age of the victim is around 19 years as per the medical examination.
4. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the bail prayer.
5. Considering the two statements of the victim not supporting the prosecution case and the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is languishing in jail since 22.10.2025, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Dilip Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Vinay Kumar .....Applicant(s) The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s)
6. Let the applicant Vinay Kumar be released on bail in the aforesaid first information report on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings; (b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and
(c) 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. December 19, 2025 akverma BAIL No. 12641 of 2025 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench