Victim's testimony confirms voluntary departure; negligent officers face consequences.
In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court has granted bail to Amit, the applicant in a high-profile enticement case, after the victim's statement revealed no wrongdoing on his part. The court, presided over by Justice Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal, also imposed a cost of Rs. 1,00,000 on the State Government due to the negligence of certain police officers in handling the case.
The case, identified as Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 22140 of 2026, involved charges under Sections 137 (2), 87, 64(1) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 5/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. The victim, in her statement recorded under Sections 180 and 183 BNSS, stated she left her home voluntarily and was in a relationship with the applicant, Amit, negating allegations of enticement.
During the proceedings, the court observed a pattern of delayed instructions in bail matters from Gorakhpur, prompting an inquiry by Dr. Kaustubh, the Senior Superintendent of Police, Gorakhpur. The inquiry found negligence on the part of S.H.O. Pankaj Kumar Singh, Sub-Inspector Sarvesh Kumar, and Constable Ramesh Yadav, leading to their reassignment to the police line.
Despite opposition from the Additional Government Advocate, the court granted bail to Amit, citing the absence of criminal history and the unnecessary prolonged detention due to police negligence. The court laid down conditions for Amit's bail, emphasizing cooperation in the trial and refraining from criminal activities.
Justice Deshwal's decision also highlighted systemic issues within the police department, directing the recovery of imposed costs from the negligent officers and ensuring compliance with bail instruction protocols. The court's order mandates swift communication of bail orders to expedite the release process and prevent future lapses.
This ruling underscores the judiciary's commitment to justice and accountability, particularly when procedural lapses impact individual liberties.
Bottom line:-
Bail application was allowed considering the victim's statement that she voluntarily left her house and no wrong was committed by the accused. Costs imposed on the State Government due to negligence of certain police officers, with liberty to recover the amount from the erring officers.
Statutory provision(s): Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Sections 137, 87, 64(1), Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Sections 5/6
Amit v. State of U.P., (Allahabad) : Law Finder Doc id # 2943771
