Allowed

Chetan Chauhan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Nov 2018BAIL/38648/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a bail application filed by Chetan Chauhan in a case alleging sexual assault on a child. The applicant argued false implication and procedural discrepancies regarding the timeline of the FIR versus the arrest. The court found the case fit for bail.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail upon executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties, subject to conditions prohibiting tampering with evidence, threatening witnesses, and repeating the offen

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

¶1

Court No. - 53

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38648 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Chetan Chauhan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Rao,Sri O.P. Singh, Sr. Adv. Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.

¶5

This is a bail application on behalf of Chetan Chauhan in connection with Case Crime No.0338 of 2018, under Sections 452, 376, 511 I.P.C. read with U Sec. 5/6 Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012, P.S. Noida Sector 39, District Gautam Budh Nagar.

¶6

Heard Sri O.P.Singh, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Sri S.K.Rao, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Indrajeet Yadav, learned AGA along with Sri Mayank Awasthi, learned counsel on behalf of the State.

¶7

The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that he has been falsely implicated in the present crime on account of a petty dispute between the mother of the prosecutrix and the applicant about some monetary transaction detailed in paragraph no.10 of the affidavit in support of the bail application. It is submitted that in the first information report and in the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. as also in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the allegation is one of attempt to ravish the prosecutrix. It is pointed out that medico legal examination was declined by the mother of the prosecutrix which gives rise to a presumption against the prosecution. Emphasis has been laid by Sri O.P.Singh, learned Senior Counsel on the fact that the chik first information report was lodged in the intervening night of 23/24.04.2018 at 1.44 a.m. whereas the applicant has been arrested in connection with the present crime on 23.04.2018 at 8.20 a.m., a fact that is shown in the arrest memo dated 23.04.2018. Learned Senior Counsel submitted that the aforesaid inaccuracy of the record goes to the root of the matter and shows that the first information report is ante timed, and, the prosecution is entirely bogus. This Court by a detailed order on 01.11.2018 had required the State to explain this discrepancy, which prima facie shows the first information report to be ante timed.

¶8

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail on instructions but submits that the aforesaid discrepant record is on account of a clerical error.

¶9

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of punishment, the evidence appearing in the case, in particular, the fact that the statement shows a case of an attempt about which also there is no medico legal evidence besides the fact that there is no explanation as to how the accused was arrested on 23.04.2018 at 8.20 a.m. and in the arrest memo with the present crime endorsed, relating to a case that was registered on 23/24.04.2018 at 1.44 a.m., but with without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.

¶10

Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed .

¶11

Let the applicant Chetan Chauhan in connection with Case Crime No.0338 of 2018, under Sections 452, 376, 511 I.P.C. read with U Sec. 5/6 Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012, P.S. Noida Sector 39, District Gautam Budh Nagar be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶12

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶13

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.

¶14

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

¶15

iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.

¶16

v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the complainant would be free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.

¶18

Order Date :- 2.11.2018

¶19

R./

Chetan Chauhan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chetan Chauhan 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

Tinchu Alias Sarvesh Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Data Ram Vs State of U.P.

Boby Vs State of U.P.

Bablu Kumar Alias Suraj Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Vishal Vs State of U.P.

Krishna Vs State of U.P.