Allowed

Rizwan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC31 Aug 2020BAIL/22023/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge granted bail to Rizwan accused under IPC 363, 366 and POCSO sections for allegedly enticing a minor. The applicant surrendered, claiming false allegations after denied marriage. The court observed he has no criminal history and the victim did not allege rape in her 164 statement.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with a personal bond and two sureties in like amounts, subject to conditions of non-tampering with evidence and appearance in court.

Rizwan Vs State of U.P. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 42

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22023 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Rizwan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Fakhruzzaman Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

¶5

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

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the F.I.R. of the alleged incident has been lodged against the applicant with allegation that the applicant enticed away the victim, who was minor, aged about 16 years. It has further been submitted that false allegation has been made against the applicant. The real fact is that the marriage of the applicant and victim was fixed by the parents of victim but they denied for marriage. The applicant and victim love each other. The victim was recovered after 2 days. In her statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. the victim has not made any allegation of rape against the applicant. False allegation has been made against the applicant. The applicant has not committed the alleged offence. There is no criminal history of the applicant and he is in jail since 11.5.2020.

¶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 Rizwan involved in Case Crime No. 143 of 2020, under Section 363, 366 IPC and 7/8 POCSO Act Police Station Kotwali District Jhansi be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions;

¶10

The applicant will not tamper with the evidences.

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

Order Date :- 31.8.2020 Gss

Rizwan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rizwan 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

Amarjeet Yadav @ Kundan Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Fahim Vs State of U.P.

Shahzeb Vs State of U.P.

Mehraj Vs State of U.P.

Ranveer Vs State of U.P.

Abhinash Dubey Vs State of U.P.