Allowed

Krishna Kumar Sonkar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 Sept 2019BAIL/39689/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under sections 376, 506 IPC and POCSO Act, the court considered allegations of sexual assault and blackmail by the applicant against a minor girl. After weighing arguments regarding false FIR versus corroborating evidence, the court granted bail with conditions to prevent tampering with witnesses and commission of further crimes.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount, subject to three conditions regarding witness tampering, cooperation, and abstinence from crime.

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

¶1

Court No. - 88

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39689 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Krishna Kumar Sonkar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Yatindra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Yatindra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Amit Singh Chauhan, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Krishna Kumar Sonkar with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 357 of 2019, under Sections 376 and 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station- Mugal Sarai, District- Chandauli , during pendency of trial.

¶7

It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that as per the allegations made in the F.I.R. which has been lodged by the prosecutrix herself, she has stated that she is 19 year old and her mother has expired on 14.01.2018. She has further alleged that she resides with her grandmother (Nani). It has been further alleged in the first information report that the applicant was doing parvi in some local dispute related to her grandmother. When her grandmother and father used to go for selling fruit on a daily basis, by taking advantage of her being alone, the applicant entered into her house and sexually assaulted her. This incident was captured by means of photographs and videos in the mobile and by showing the same she was threatened that in case she shared the incident with anyone, he would kill the family members of the prosecutrix. The prosecutrix was being blackmailed and was sexually assaulted on several occasions, whenever, she was alone in her house. The marriage of the prosecutrix was fixed with one Himanshu who is resident of Varanasi and the applicant send whats app messages to Himanshu due to which her marriage was broken.

¶8

It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that as the applicant was doing parvi in a case of her grandmother, the grandmother of the prosecutrix did not have the intention to pay the required money for doing parvi in the case, since there was some dispute in that respect, the present F.I.R has been lodged with false and frivolous allegations. The statement of the prosecutrix has been recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is a repetition of the F.I.R. There is nothing in the medical report to corroborate the allegations made in the F.I.R. The applicant is languishing in jail since 24.06.2019. The applicant has no criminal history except in the present case. In case, he is

¶9

released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial by all means. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no chance of applicant fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses.

¶10

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶11

Considering the material/evidence brought on record, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , let the applicant involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions that :-

¶12

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶13

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶14

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶15

In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶16

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶17

Order Date :- 25.9.2019 Priya

Krishna Kumar Sonkar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishna Kumar Sonkar 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tuhina Vs State of U.P.

Deepak @ Bhirda Vs State of U.P.

Sarvesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Pankaj Rai Vs State of U.P.

Arun Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Ankul Kumar Vs State of U.P.