Allowed

Rahul v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC1 Aug 2018BAIL/1717/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In COSAR bail application, the court granted bail to the applicant involved in a criminal case under IPC 363, 366, 376D and POCSO. The applicant was hospitalized child sexual assault case. Bail granted on furnishing personal bond and two sureties with conditions to not tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on personal bond and two sureties on prescribed conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 52

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1717 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Rahul Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ganga Bhushan Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 07 of 2017, u/s 363, 366, 376D IPC and 5/6 POCSO Act, P.S. Shahjahanpur, District Jhansi with the prayer for enlarging him on bail.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the age of the prosecutrix as per the ossification test was found to be 17 years. She was recovered after few days of her elopement with the applicant. She has stated before the doctor that she had gone Ahmadabad with the applicant on 10.1.2017 where physical relations were established between them. Thereafter she came back. Learned counsel submitted that under the pressure of her father she changed entire version in the statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C. Lastly it is submitted that during trial the prosecutrix has not supported the prosecution case and has been declared hostile. The applicant is in jail since 20.1.2017.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. However he could not point out anything material to the contrary.

¶9

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶10

Let the applicant Rahul involved in the aforesaid case crime number 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 with the following conditions:-

¶11

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶12

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶13

(iii)The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed.

¶14

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶15

Order Date :- 1.8.2018

¶16

Dhirendra/

Rahul v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ibrar Vs State of U.P.

Suraj Singh Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shahrukh Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shahrukh Vs State of U.P.

Abhishek Kumar Singh @ Sanjeev Singh Vs State of U.P.

Faisal Vs State of U.P.