Amar Singh vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others

Kripa Shankar Yadav, Mohammad Qais, Neha Rani, Pawan Kumar Yadav, Satyvendra Singh Yadav

Counsel for Opposite Party(s)

:

Chaman Aara, G.A.

Court No. - 65

(Sr. No.90 out of 259)

HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

1. List has been revised. Learned A.G.A. has informed that the notice to the informant has been served on 09.01.2026, but none is present on behalf of the informant.

2. Heard Sri Satyvendra Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Chaman Aara, learned counsel for the High Court Legal Service Committee, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.544 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(2)(m) BNS and Section 5L/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Dhanghata, District Sant Kabir Nagar, during the pendency of trial.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The victim, in her statement recorded under Section 183 BNSS, has stated that she was not enticed away by the applicant and she knew that the applicant had two children from his earlier marriage and she stayed with the applicant at Kanpur for a week. She has stated that now she does not want to go with the applicant, as such, it is a clear-cut case of false implication. It is true that the applicant is a married person and case may fall within the purview of moral turpitude, but there is no offence committed by the applicant. The victim, by her appearance, seems to be major, although she is 18 years old as per ossification test report. The applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 28.10.2025. He undertakes to cooperate with the trial and not misuse the liberty of bail.

5. Learned counsel for the High Court Legal Service Committee and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the bail application but could not dispute the submissions made by the counsel for the applicant.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 BNSS, which indicates her consent, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, prima-facie the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

7. Let the applicant- Amar Singh, 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.

8. Breach of any condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observations herein shall not affect the trial on merits.

(Krishan Pahal,J.)

May 6, 2026

(Ravi Kant)