Pushpendra vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others

1. List has been revised. As informed by learned A.G.A., notice has been served to the informant on 18.4.2026.

2. Heard Sri Sanjay Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State, Ms. Shabista Parveen, learned counsel for the respondent no. 3 and perused the material placed on record.

3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 296 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 87, 64(1) BNS and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Bakewar, District Etawah, during the pendency of trial.

4, The applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The victim is a consenting party, as is evident from her statement recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S., wherein she stated that she had been in a relationship with the applicant for the last two years and that they had solemnized their marriage at Indore. There is no medical corroboration of the incident. The victim, by her physical appearance, seems to be major although her age is 17 years as per ossification test report and a leverage of two years may be granted to the applicant on the upper side.

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 statement of the victim recorded u/s 183 BNSS, whereby she seems to be consenting party, as she had been in a relationship with the applicant for the last two years and that they had solemnized their marriage at Indore, there being no medical corroboration of the incident, there being no recovery of any indecent video or photograph of the victim 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- Pushpendra 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. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

8. 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 7, 2026

Sushma