Allowed

Gopal Dharikar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Nov 2019BAIL/46065/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to the applicant in a criminal case involving alleged offences under IPC and POCSO. The court noted the victim's age and lack of prior complaints but granted bail on standard conditions without expressing an opinion on the merits of the charges.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with conditions not to tamper with evidence or intimidate witnesses.

Gopal Dharikar Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 41

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46065 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Gopal Dharikar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vineet Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Vineet Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in medical report the age of victim has been shown about 18 years. In school record her date of birth has been shown as 12.9.2001. As per school record at the time of alleged incident the victim was above 17 and 1/2 years of age. The statement of victim recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. indicates that there was friendship in between the applicant and the victim. The victim has stated that the applicant had been making physical relation with her for the last six months but till the lodging of F.I.R. no complaint has been made by the victim to anyone which shows that the victim was a consenting party. It has been further submitted that in the statement of victim recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. it has come that the victim travelled with the applicant at several places prior to lodging of the F.I.R. and they were enjoining company of each other. The victim has made false allegation of rape against the applicant under pressure of her parents. The victim herself refused for forensic examination. The applicant has not committed the alleged offence. No offence is made out against the applicant. Criminal history of the applicant has been explained in paragraph no. 19 of the affidavit filed in support of bail application. The applicant is in jail since 4.8.2019.

¶7

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail.

¶8

Having given my thoughtful consideration to the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail.

¶9

Let the applicant Gopal Dharikar involved in Case Crime No.143 of 2019 under Section 363, 366, 376, 504, 506 IPC, Section 3/4 POCSO Act and section 67 of the Information Technology Act, Police Station Sonauli District Maharajganj be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two

¶10

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

¶11

The applicant will not tamper with the evidences.

¶12

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and he will cooperate with the trial.

¶13

The applicant will appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned.

¶14

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

¶15

Order Date :- 6.11.2019 Gss

Gopal Dharikar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gopal Dharikar 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

Ajeet Kumar and Another Vs State of Up and Anr.

Pusai @ Raj Kumar and 3 Others Vs State of Up and Anr.

Ramjee Yadav @ Guddu Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Sahani Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanjay Shrivas Vs State of U.P.

Krishna Murari Vs State of U.P.