Allowed

Manish v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Feb 2018BAIL/6452/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted bail to the applicant in a kidnapping and abduction case involving allegations under IPC and POCSO. Finding no evidence connecting the applicant to the offence and noting his clean criminal record, the court allowed the bail application subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties subject to conditions regarding tampering, intimidation, and offence recurrence.

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

¶1

Court No. - 22

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6452 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Manish Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anoop Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged on 15.10.2017 by the informant against four accused persons namely, Maneesh Rajbhar, Surendra Rajbhar, Khajanchi and Arjun Rajbhar alleging that on 10.10.2017 they kidnapped the daughter (11 years) of complainant Chandrabhan Rajbhar and compelled her for marriage.

¶7

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that there is no evidence to connect the applicant with the present matter. Entire prosecution story is false and concocted. There is no independent witness. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. In the statement recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C. the prosecutrix has stated that no one has abducted her. She has also stated that she had gone with Manish to the house of his mama and he requested to marry, she denied, he left the house, he has done nothing wrong with her. In case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail; he is in jail since 25.10.2017 (more than two and half months) having no criminal history.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant and admitted that applicant has no criminal history.

¶9

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence the bail application is hereby allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant Manish involved in S.T. No. 557 of 2017 as well as Case Crime No. 517 of 2017, under Sections 363, 366, 504, 506 IPC and Section 7/8 POCSO Act, P.S. Ram Kola, District Kushinagar be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

¶11

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶12

2.The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶13

3.The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶14

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

¶15

5.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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 21.2.2018 A. Singh

Manish v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manish 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

Ahsutosh Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Ramraj Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Subash Chand Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ujendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Jai Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P.

Chand Babu Ahmad Vs State of U.P.