Allahabad High Court
BAIL/12913/2025 of RAM MOHAN MAURYA Vs STATE OF U.P. THRU. SECY. HOMEE DEPTT. LKO AND 3 OTHERS on 18 December 2025
JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12913 of 2025 Court No. - 12 HON'BLE PANKAJ BHATIA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State; Shri Pankaj Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the informant and perused the record. 2. The applicant
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12913 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, learned AGA for the State; Shri Pankaj Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.
2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.429 of 2025, under Section 137(2), 70(2) of BNS & Section 5g/6 of POCSO Act, P.S. Colonelganj, District Gonda.
3. In terms of the FIR allegations are levelled that daughter of the informant aged about 17 years was missing and was enticed by some unknown person. Subsequently, in her statement under Section 180 BNSS, victim stated that she was scolded by her mother, as such, she left home and there she met one Ankit and the said Ankit and Danish formed physical relations with her. Thereafter, she came back and met some other person. In the statement under Section 183 BNSS, the applicant was not named.
4. Learned AGA, based upon instructions, states that the applicant was linked with the offence in question based upon analysis of the mobile phone in which name of the applicant also appeared.
5. Considering the two statements in which the applicant was not named and the investigation against the applicant in respect of analysis of mobile records is yet to happen, prima-facie, the material to keep the applicant Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Kailash Nath Mishra, Rahul Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ram Mohan Maurya .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Homee Deptt. Lko And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s)
under detention is missing, as such, the applicant who is in custody since 21.10.2025 and has no criminal antecedents, is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed.
6. Let the applicant Ram Mohan Maurya be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of 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 18, 2025 nishant BAIL No. 12913 of 2025 2 (Pankaj Bhatia,J.) Digitally signed by :- NISHANT MOHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench