SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(All) 96080

HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
Sachin – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. And 3 Others – Respondent


Advocates:
Petitioner: Dev Prakash Sharma and Priyanka Devi
Respondent: G.A.

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

1. List has been revised.

2. Heard Ms. Priyanka Devi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

3. Learned A.G.A. has informed that the notice to the informant has been served on 04.03.2025.

4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.2 of 2025, under Sections 137(2), 87, 64 B.N.S. and Section 5-J(2)/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Aata, District Jalaun, during the pendency of trial.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by about 3 days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The victim is a consenting party as is but evident from her statement recorded under Section 183 B.N.S.S. She has gone with the applicant on a motorcycle and has travelled to several places and has not raised any alarm whatsoever. Learned counsel has further stated that the victim is major, although as per school leaving certificate, her date of birth is 18.07.2008, as such, her age comes out to be 16 years, 5 months and 1 day.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant has further a

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top