Mohammad Irsad @ Nate 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 27.4.2026.

2. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

3. Heard Sri Rayoof Ali, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri A.K. Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 366 of 2024, under Sections 376-AB IPC and 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Dhanghata, District Sant Kabir Nagar, during the pendency of trial.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the medical report of the victim wherein no injury has been observed on the internal and external part of the body of the victim, although she is stated to be 9 years old; the delay of more than one day in lodging of FIR; and there being no criminal history of the applicant except one case instituted subsequent to the instant case and which stands explained 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.

6. Let the applicant- Mohammad Irsad @ Nate, 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.

7. Breach of any of the above condition shall entail cancellation of bail. The observation herein shall not affect the trial on merits.

(Krishan Pahal,J.)

May 7, 2026

Shalini