Govind @ Akash vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others

1. List has been revised. As informed by learned A.G.A. notice to the informant has been served on 23.4.2026.

2. Heard Sri Tikendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri D.K. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 434 of 2025, under Sections 65(1), 123, 351(2) BNS and 3/4(2) POCSO Act, Police Station Chhata, District Mathura, during the pendency of trial.

ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF APPLICANT:

4. The applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by more than five months and there is no explanation of the said delay caused.

5. It is true that victim is minor but the instant case is a clear-cut case of false implication, as he has been implicated in another case of similar nature by the villagers out of vengeance and in the said case, the bail application of the applicant is pending before this Court. There is no medical corroboration of the incident.

6. The applicant is languishing in jail since 5.9.2025 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF STATE/INFORMANT:

7. Learned A.G.A. opposed the bail application but could not dispute the aforesaid submissions of learned counsel for the applicant.

CONCLUSION:

8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the delay of more than five months in lodging the FIR, 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.

9. Let the applicant- Govind @ Akash, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to verification of sureties, with the condition that he shall not tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses and shall appear before the trial court as required.

10. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

11. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

(Krishan Pahal,J.)

May 6, 2026

Shalini