Allowed

Shiv Shankar Mestar @ Shiv Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Aug 2018BAIL/29402/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted bail to the applicant accused of kidnapping, rape, and POCSO offences. It noted the first report was lodged late and the prosecutrix testified to a consensual relationship and marriage. The applicant, having no criminal antecedents, was released on personal bond and two sureties subject to standard bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with personal bond and two reliable sureties subject to conditions not to tamper with evidence, pressurize witnesses, or fail to appear in court.

Shiv Shankar Mestar @ Shiv Kumar Vs State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 52

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29402 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Shiv Shankar Mestar @ Shiv Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Raghawendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed by the applicant today, which is taken on record.

¶6

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

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.23 of 2018, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Sukhpura, District Ballia, with the prayer to release him on bail.

¶8

It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is wholly innocent and had not committed any offence whatsoever. The first information report was lodged by the father of prosecutrix after eleven days of the incident. It is further argued that the applicant and co-accused had kidnapped his minor daughter. The prosecutrix was recovered after about two and half months. Her statement was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. in which she has admitted that she loves with the applicant for the past one year. She has stated that she had gone with the applicant to Delhi and solemnized marriage with him. She has corroborated her version in the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., according to which she has stated to be 19 years of age. As per medical report her age is determined to be more than 18 years. The applicant is languishing in jail since 26.5.2018 having no criminal antecedents.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not point out anything material to the contrary.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made, without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶11

Let applicant Shiv Shankar Mestar @ Shiv Kumar, 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 :-

¶12

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶13

(2) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶14

(3) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial Court.

¶15

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

¶16

Order Date :- 7.8.2018 Hasnain

Shiv Shankar Mestar @ Shiv Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Shankar Mestar @ Shiv Kumar 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

Sandeep Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Javed Vs State of U.P.

Srikrishn @ Ramkrishn Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Rai Vs State of U.P. and Another

Faisal Vs State of U.P.

Ram Swaroop Vs State of U.P.