Allowed

Samir v. State of U.P and Another

Allahabad HC1 Dec 2020BAIL/35829/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Sections 363, 376, 504 IPC and POCSO Act, the court noted the gravity of the offences but did not express an opinion on merits, finding it fit for bail. The accused Samir was released on a personal bond with sureties and specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on executing a personal bond with two sureties subject to conditions of not tampering with evidence, threats, and appearing in trial.

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

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35829 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Samir Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Singh Chandel 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 Samir in connection with Case Crime No.396 of 2020, under Sections 363, 376, 504 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Vijay Nagar, district Ghaziabad.

¶7

The first information report of this incident was lodged by the complainant, the brother of the victim against four accused persons including the applicant and in the FIR the allegation of enticing away the victim was levelled only against the present accused.

¶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 a ulterior motive. He submitted that the incident is alleged to have taken place on 22.02.2020 and the first information report of this incident was lodged on 06.03.2020, after a delay of about 14 days without any plausible explanation. He submitted that the alleged victim in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has stated that the present accused has committed rape with her on the false pretext of marrying her. He submitted that the victim was in consensual relationship with the applicant. He submitted that the victim has lived with the applicant with her own sweet will and she has not raised any alarm any-where to save herself from the clutches of the accused. He further submitted that the medical does not support the allegation of rape as the hymen was found old torn and healed. He further submitted that there was no sign of physical assault on the person of the victim. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 20.06.2020 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.

¶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 Samir 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. ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses;

¶14

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;

¶15

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.

¶16

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.

¶17

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.

¶18

Order Date :- 1.12.2020 R./

Samir v. State of U.P and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samir 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

Munish Vs State of U.P.

Mohit Vs State of U.P.

Jagdish Paswan Vs State of U.P.

Ramlagan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Guddu @ Abhay Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Narendra Vs State of U.P.