Allowed

Kallu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC11 Sept 2018BAIL/14666/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted bail in a criminal bail application filed under IPC Sections 363, 366, 376 and POCSO. The applicant, having no prior criminal history and facing a prolonged trial, was released subject to personal bond, sureties, and conditions prohibiting tampering with evidence or witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Kallu Vs State of U.P. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 52

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14666 of 2018 Applicant :- Kallu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Bahadur Singh,B.N.Singh,Santosh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶4

Heard Sri B.N.Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶5

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-Kallu in Case Crime No.31 of 2014, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and 3/4 of The Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 Police Station Rampura, District-Jalaun with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶6

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case.The victim has been examined as PW 1 in the trial and she has not supported the prosecution version and has also gone to the extent of resiling from her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The other co-accused, namely, Neelu and Rinku have been granted bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 11825 of 2018 and 15984 of 2018 vide orders dated 2.4.2018 and 3.5.2018 respectively. There is no early prospect of conclusion of trial. So, the applicant, who is in jail since 20.12.2017, having no criminal history to his credit, also deserves to be released on bail.

¶7

Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not point out anything material to the contrary.

¶8

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶9

Let applicant-Kallu be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions that:-

¶10

1.The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶11

2.The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶12

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

¶13

In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the courts below shall be at liberty to cancel bail of the applicant.

¶14

Order Date :- 11.9.2018

¶15

MN/-

Kallu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kallu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanju Sahani Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Sahai Singh Vs State of U.P.

Mukesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Rajbhar Vs State of U.P.

Pintoo Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dhirendra @ Dhiru Singh Vs State of U.P.