Allowed

Sonu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC29 Jan 2019BAIL/4027/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 4027 of 2019, the Court allowed bail for an applicant charged with kidnapping and abduction of a minor. The Court found it a fit case for bail after hearing counsel and perusing the record despite the serious nature of the allegations. The applicant was ordered to furnish a personal bond and two sureties.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Sonu was released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties on the specified conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4027 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Sonu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kuldeep Singh Chahar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶6

This case has been assigned by The Hon'ble The Chief Justice vide order dated 29.1.2019.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Ladlee Pandey, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

¶8

According to the prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged against the present applicant alleging that on 30.11.2018 he kidnapped the daughter of the complainant Rakhi, who was 17 years of age and compelled her to marry with him.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 5.12.2018 (about one and half months) having no criminal history; there is no eye witness account; there is no independent witness; the prosecutrix in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has stated that the applicant has not abducted her; due to misbehave by her parents she went to Agra; she was arrested by the Police personnel; nobody has kidnapped her and he do not know the present applicant; hence there is no legal evidence against the applicant; the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶10

On the other hand, 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 the applicant has no criminal history.

¶11

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.

¶12

Let the applicant Sonu involved in Case Crime No. 449 of 2018, under Section 363 & 366, P.S.-Shamshabad, DistrictAgra be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two

¶13

sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

5.The appellant 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.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 29.1.2019

¶21

Sonu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonu 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

Gangaram Gangwar Vs State of U.P.

Ali Hasan Vs State of U.P.

Saddam Vs State of U.P.

Samajhdar Vs State of U.P.

Taaj Mohammad Vs State of U.P.

Amit @ Rahul Vs State of U.P.