NADEEMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
         CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22768 of 2025

Nadeem
                                                            .....Applicant(s)
                                   Versus

State Of U.P. And 3 Others
                                                                .....Opposite
                                                                      Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)      : Mohd Faiz, Najam Uz Zaman Khan,
                                Sandip Kumar Shukla, Zahid Khan
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 65
                 HON'BLE DR. GAUTAM CHOWDHARY, J.

1. Office vide its report dated 27.08.2025 has reported that notice issued
to the first informant of the case has been served personally, inspite of
service of notice, none appears either for the informant or for the High
Court Legal Services.

2. Heard Sri Najam Uz-Zaman Khan, learned counsel for the applicant,
learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to the own
admission of the victim in her statement recorded under Section 180 of
B.N.S.S., she is aged about 19 years. She has further stated she had gone
with the applicant own free will at Meerut and nothing has been
committed, whereas the victim in her statement recorded under Section
183 of B.N.S.S., has stated that her mother had scolded her and that the
applicant does the job at Punjab, therefore she she had gone to Punjab and
stayed with the applicant for six days. It has also been stated by her that
she had not gone out of her own free. Learned counsel has next argued
perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 of
B.N.S.S. would go to show that she had gone alone instead of with the
applicant. It is thus contended that there are material contradictions in the
statements of the victim recorded under Section 180 and 183 of B.N.S.S.,.
therefore the entire prosecution story has no legs to stand and that the
applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel
has further contended that the victim had initially refused to undergo for
                                                        BAIL No. 22768 of 2025
                               2


medical examination, copy of which is annexed as Annexure-4 to the
affidavit accompanying the bail application, however later on, she was
medically examined on 28.03.2025 and her hymen was found old healed
torn. Learned counsel has next argued that the applicant is innocent and
he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive.
Learned counsel next argued that the applicant has no criminal history.
Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the
allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the
Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false
implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been
assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the
process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court
whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the
Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is
languishing in jail since 22.03.2025.

4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the
applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be
adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence.

5. After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar
and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this
case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing
material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence,
without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this Court is of the
view, that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

6. Let applicant Nadeem involved in Case Crime No.78 of 2025 under
Sections 137(2), 87, 123, 64, 352 of B.N.S., Section 3/4 of POCSO Act,
Section 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act, Police Station Chhara, District Aligarh, be
released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local heavy
sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned
subject to the following conditions:-

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
                                                                                             BAIL No. 22768 of 2025
                                                                    3


                                    iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.

                                    iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of
                                    which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.

                                    v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement,
                                    threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as
                                    to dissuade such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police
                                    officer or tamper with the evidence.

                                    7. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the trial Court shall be
                                    at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant in accordance with law.

                                    8. The bail application is allowed.




                                                                                   (Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.)
                                    March 19, 2026
                                    S.Ali




Digitally signed by :-
SHAUKAT ALI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad