Sumit Alias Hau v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26389 of 2025 Court No. - 65 (Sl. No. 119 out of 262) HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

¶1List has been revised. The names of three counsels have been shown in the cause list although Sri Mohit Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, has submitted an illness slip and is not present.

¶2Heard Sri Mohd. Afzal Ansari, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rizwan Nazis, Advocate holding brief of Sri Atul Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State and also perused the material placed on record.

¶3Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 193 of 2025, under Sections 65(1), 74, 351(2) of BNS and Sections 3/7(2) of POCSO Act, Police Station - Kankerkhera, District - Meerut, during the pendency of trial.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence as alleged in the FIR. The FIR is delayed by about six days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused.

¶5Learned counsel has also stated that a false story of gang rape has been cooked up by the victim. There is material contradictions in her statement as at one stage, she was going to the hospital and on the other stage, she was coming from the hospital. It is further stated that the victim is more than 14 years-old but by her looks, she seems to be major although there Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mohd. Afzal Ansari, Mohit Kumar Singh, Sujata Choudhary Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Atul Kumar Tiwari, G.A. Sumit Alias Hau .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) is no valid documentary evidence to indicate that she was minor. There is no medical corroboration of the incident.

¶6Learned counsel has next contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 25.03.2025, having no criminal history, deserves to be released on bail. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with trial.

¶7Per contra, learned AGA and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant and also the fact that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶8Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the delay in lodging the FIR, the contradictions in the statement of the victim, absence of any reliable documentary evidence regarding her age, and lack of medical corroboration of the alleged incident, this Court finds that the matter requires appreciation of evidence during trial. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for grant of bail. The bail application is accordingly allowed.

¶9Let the applicant-Sumit Alias Hau, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to verification of sureties, with the conditions that he shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the trial court as required.

¶10Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations herein shall not affect the trial on merits. April 2, 2026 Siddhant BAIL No. 26389 of 2025 (Krishan Pahal,J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad