Allowed

Kaushal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC19 Apr 2019BAIL/16150/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge allowed the bail application of the applicant, Kaushal, charged with kidnapping, abduction, and Section 376 IPC along with POCSO charges. The Court found that facts suggested a false implication and the applicant had no criminal history or bail misuse risk.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by executing personal bond and furnishing two sureties subject to standard conditions.

Kaushal Vs State of U.P. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 44

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16150 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Kaushal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Brajendra Kumar,Naresh Kumar Pal 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 11.11.2018 by the informant against two accused persons namely, Kaushal and Umesh Babu alleging that on 5.11.2018 they kidnapped the daughter (17 years and five months) of complainant Chhotelal 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. According to medical report, prosecutrix is aged about 18 years and major. 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 had gone on her own sweet will and her consent; he has done nothing wrong with her. She has also stated that she loved Kaushal and marriage was solemnized with him. In case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail; he is languishing in jail since 16.1.2019 (more than three 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 Kaushal involved in the Case Crime No. 63 of 2018, under Sections 363, 366 and 376(1) IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Chakar Nagar, District Etawah be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the

¶11

satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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.

¶16

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.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 19.4.2019

¶19

A. Singh

Kaushal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kaushal 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

Mumtaz Ali and Others Vs State of U.P.

Gautam Bangali Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Bhagwati Devi @ Bhagwati Devi Vs State of U.P.

Raj Kumar @ Banwa Vs State of U.P.

Anil Kumar Dixit Vs State of U.P. and Another

Alauddin Vs State of U.P.