Lalit 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 21.8.2025.

2. Heard Sri Devottam Pandey, learned Advocate holding brief for Sri Pramod Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant as well as 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. 274 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 65(1) BNS and 5(L)/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Sector-113 Noida, District Gautam Buddha Nagar, 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 applicant is not named in the FIR, which is delayed by about five days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused.

5. The victim is a consenting party as is evident from her statement recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S., whereby she has stated that she has married the applicant and stayed with him for two days. The victim, by her physical appearance, seems to be major although her date of birth is 14.5.2011 as per Class VII certificate. There is no valid document to suggest that victim was minor.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that there is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 16.7.2025 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. The bail application has been vehemently opposed but the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant could not be disputed.

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 fact that applicant is not named in the FIR; the statement of the victim recorded u/s 183 BNSS, whereby she seems to be consenting party 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- Lalit, 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