Allowed

Girraj v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC31 Aug 2020BAIL/23997/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a bail application filed by Girraj, accused under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and POCSO Act, for enticing away a minor girl. The court found it to be a fit case for bail despite grave offences, subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Accused released on bail upon executing personal bond with two sureties subject to conditions against tampering with evidence and witnesses.

Girraj Vs State of U.P. and Another — Child Custody and Guardianship | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23997 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Girraj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dileep Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.

¶6

This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Girraj in connection with Case Crime No.578 of 2019, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Ramgarh, District Firozabad.

¶7

The first information report of this incident was lodged by the complainant, Seema Devi alleging that on 15.12.2019 Ajay and Ravi, both sons of the applicant along with Gaurav have enticed away the daughter of the complainant.

¶8

The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with the ulterior motive. He submitted that the applicant has been assigned the role of helping the main accused, Ravi and Ajay, who have enticed away the daughter of the complainant, who happens to be the son of the applicant. He further submitted that the victim is aged about sixteen and half years and the victim has gone with her own free will with the son of the applicant. He further submitted that the girl has lived with the son of the applicant for about three months. He further submitted that the girl was in consensual relations with the son of the applicant. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 13.03.2020 and in case, he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail plea but has not disputed the fact that the girl has lived with the son of the applicant four about three months.

¶10

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail. Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant Girraj involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶12

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶13

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution

¶14

witnesses;

¶15

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission;

¶16

v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the learned counsel for the applicant alongwith a self attested identity prof of the said persons (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.

¶18

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶19

Order Date :- 31.8.2020 R./

Girraj v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Girraj v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Narayan Singh Vs State of U.P.

Harish Chandra Vs State of U.P.

Geeta Devi Vs State of U.P.

Anand Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Poonam Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vineet Gaud Vs State of U.P. and Another