Allowed

Mohit Pal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC15 Nov 2018BAIL/43412/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed bail application for applicant Mohit Pal accused under IPC Sections 363, 366, 376 and POCSO. Court found fit case for bail considering prosecutrix is prima facie major and her section 164 Cr.P.C. statement is exculpatory, imposing standard bond and conduct conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail upon executing personal bond and furnishing two sureties with conditions against tampering, threatening, and committing similar offences.

Mohit Pal Vs State of U.P. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 53

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43412 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Mohit Pal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.

¶5

This is a bail application on behalf of Mohit Pal in connection with Case Crime No.861 of 2018 under Sections 363, 366, 376 of I.P.C. and 3/4 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012, P.S. Kotwali City, District Muzaffar Nagar.

¶6

Heard Sri Sushil Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Nitin Kesarwani, learned AGA along with Sri Rohit Pandey, learned counsel on behalf of the State.

¶7

The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the prosecutrix is a major aged about 19 years. He has invited the attention of the Court to the medico legal estimation of the prosecutrix's age based on an ossification test regarding which there is a certificate issued by the Chief Medical Officer, Muzaffar Nagar dated 29.08.2018 opining her to be aged about 19 years. Learned counsel for the applicant has further taken the Court through the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., where the prosecutrix has stated in categorical terms that she is in love with the applicant and married him. It is also said that the first information report has been lodged by her family members as they are opposed to the matrimonial alliance selected by the prosecutrix and the applicant for themselves.

¶8

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but does not dispute the fact that prima facie, the prosecutrix is a major going by the medico legal estimation of her age and further that the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is, prima facie, exculpatory.

¶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 prosecutrix is prima facie a major and the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., is exculpatory, but 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 Mohit Pal in connection with Case Crime No.861 of 2018 under Sections 363, 366, 376 of I.P.C. and 3/4

¶12

of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012, P.S. Kotwali City, District Muzaffar 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:

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

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.

¶18

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.

¶19

Order Date :- 15.11.2018

¶20

R./

Mohit Pal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohit Pal 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

Vipin Mishra Vs State of U.P.

vishnu @ vinay Vs State of U.P.

Rajju Alias Bangali Vs State of U.P.

Rajan Agrahari Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Bade Lalla @ Jaduveer Singh Vs State of U.P.

Ravindra @ Ravi Vs State of U.P.