Allowed

Shravan Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC3 Dec 2020BAIL/27413/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the Allahabad High Court, while noting the gravity of the charges including those under POCSO and IPC, found it to be a fit case for bail without expressing an opinion on the merits. The applicant was granted bail subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail upon executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties subject to conditions prohibiting tampering with evidence and ensuring court appearance.

Shravan Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27413 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Shravan Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arvind Kumar Yadav holding brief of Sri Prem Prakash Yadav, learned counsel for the complainant and the learned A.G.A.

¶6

This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Shravan Kumar in connection with Case Crime No.81 of 2019, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Protection of Children From Sexual offence Act (POCSO Act), 2012, Police Station Myorpur, district Sonebhadra.

¶7

The first information report of this incident was lodged by the complainant against the disappearance of his daughter. It was alleged in the first information report that his daughter was enticed away by the applicant. The age of the victim was narrated to be 14 years.

¶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 alleged victim was a consenting party and she had gone out of her own sweet will with the applicant and the alleged victim has not raised any alarm about her forceful abduction. He submitted that the alleged victim has stated in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that she was enticed away by the applicant; she has also stated that she was ready to marry with the applicant but due to her tender age, she could not marry with the applicant. He submitted that the alleged victim has stated in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. that she was forcibly carried by the applicant in a bus to Renukoot. He submitted that the radiological age of the alleged victim was found to be between 16-18 years. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 18.07.2019 and in case, he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the complainant and the learned A.G.A. have opposed the bail plea and submitted that the victim was major and she was enticed away by the applicant.

¶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.

¶11

Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant Shravan Kumar 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:

¶13

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

¶14

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution 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 learned counsel for the applicant along with a self attested identity proof 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 :- 3.12.2020

¶20

R./

Shravan Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shravan Kumar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Somvir Chaudhari @ Sonu Chaudhari Vs State of U.P.

Chandan Bind Vs State of U.P.

Satendra@ Bholai Vs State of U.P.

Vivek Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kartik Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arvind Vs State of U.P.