Kartikey Rao vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others

1. List has been revised. Learned State Law Officer has informed that the notice to the informant has been served on 27.04.2026.

2. Heard Sri Arvind Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Jai Kishan Chaurasia, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material placed on record.

3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.12 of 2026, under Sections 137(2), 65(1)M, 87 BNS and Section 3/4(2) of POCSO Act, 2012, Police Station Babhni, District Sonbhadra, during the pendency of trial.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the delay of about one and a half months in the institution of the FIR and that the victim appears to be a consenting party as per her statement recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S., as she had stayed in the house of the applicant of her own sweet will and has stated that her parents falsely implicated the applicant, 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. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

5. Let the applicant- Kartikey Rao, 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.

6. 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)