Anil Kumar @ Ankit vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Gaurav Maurya, Kushagra Vaibhav Singh, Pradeep Kumar Singh

Counsel for Opposite Party(s) :

Court No. - 65 (Sr. No.115 out of 259)

HON'BLE KRISHAN PAHAL, J.

1. List has been revised. Rejoinder affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

2. Heard Sri Pradeep Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Manoj Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Jai Kishan Chaurasia, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the record.

3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.211 of 2025, under Sections 65(2) BNS and 5M/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Rampur Maniharan, District Saharanpur, during the pendency of trial.

PROSECUTION STORY:

4. The applicant is stated to have taken the victim to a secluded place and committed rape with her. The victim was found without any clothes in the sugarcane field, soaked with blood and was in a shock. As such, she was retrieved by the villagers.

ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT:

5. The applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case.

6. The FIR was instituted promptly, i.e. after about eight hours of the incident, but the allegations made in the FIR do not stand corroborated by any medical evidence rather the medical evidence proves it otherwise, as not a single scrimish or scratch was found on the body of the victim.

7. The medical examination of the victim was conducted on 17.06.2025 at 11:50 p.m., the same night of the institution of the FIR. Despite prompt medical examination, there is no injury sustained by the victim. As such, it is a clear-cut case of false implication.

8. Even the victim has stated that she along with applicant was handed over to the police. The said statement stands falsified from the arrest memo of the applicant, whereby he was arrested on 18.06.2025 by the police.

9. The criminal history assigned to the applicant has been explained. He is in jail since 18.6.2025. He undertakes to cooperate with the trial and not misuse the liberty of bail.

ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF STATE/INFORMANT:

10. The bail application has been opposed but the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant could not be disputed.

CONCLUSION:

11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the evidence on record and there being no medical corroboration of the incident, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

12. Let the applicant- Anil Kumar @ Ankit, 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.

13. 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 Vikas Verma