Allowed

Vikash Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Dec 2020BAIL/43685/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed bail to the applicant, Vikash Kumar, in a criminal case involving POCSO and other offences. Granting bail was based on discrepancies between the FIR and the victim's initial recorded statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., indicating the case was a fit case for enlargement.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions including no criminal activity and no tampering with evidence.

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

¶1

Court No. - 45

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43685 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Vikash Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pavan Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Chand,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for applicant(s), learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶6

This bail application has been preferred by the accusedapplicant(s),Vikash Kumar, who is involved in Case Crime No. 237 of 2020, under Sections 354-A,354-D,452,504,506 IPC and 7/8 POCSO Act, P.S.- Gagalhedi, District- Saharanpur.

¶7

The FIR version is that Vikash son of Pramod @ Chottey of the village of the informant had an evil eyes upon the 15 years old daughter of the informant ie. Sapna and he usually chased her, on 7/08.8.2020 at about 2 a.m. night Vikash intruded in the house of the informant and did the obscene act with his daughter. As the informant saw him, he after having pushed away to the informant and fled away. His mobile was left at the place of occurrence. Again on 9.8.2020 Pala son of Harpal, Brijesh son of Pala and Vikash came to the house of the informant hurling abuses to the informant and criminally intimidating him.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant contended that the FIR of the occurrence was lodged 5 days belated. The statement of the victim under section 161 Cr.P.C. does not support the FIR version while the statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. of the victim was recorded after 18 days of the occurrence which was tutorised.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant(s) in support of his prayer for bail submits that the applicant(s) is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case and has no previous criminal history. It is further submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail on 15.8.2020.

¶10

Learned AGA vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶11

The statement of the victim under section 161 Cr.P.C. is annexure-2 of the affidavit in which victim has stated that on the date and time of occurrence while she was sleeping on the first floor of the house was awakened by her father and told that some thief has entered in the house and thief was identified as

¶12

Vikash did not commit any obscene act with her and had never chased her.

¶13

The statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is annexure-4 of the affidavit. This statement was recorded on 18.8.2020 just after 10 days from the date of occurrence and in this, in her statement the victim has supported the F.I.R. version.

¶14

Keeping in view the contrary statement of the victim and under the facts and circumstances of the case it is a fit case for bail in which the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶15

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by learned counsel for both sides and going through the record, without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶16

Let applicant(s), Vikash Kumar be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶17

(i) The applicant(s) shall not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶18

(ii) The applicant(s) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶19

(iii) The applicant(s) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶20

(iv) The applicant(s) shall regularly appear on the dates fixed by the trial court unless his personal attendance is exempted by the trial court.

¶21

In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, liberty is given to the trial court to cancel the bail of the applicant(s) without any reference to this Court.

¶22

Order Date :- 7.12.2020 SKS

Vikash Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikash Kumar 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

Smt. Neelam Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Sri Anil George and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Harish Rajaura Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sandeep @ Sanju Vs State of U.P.

Bhole @ Vishal Vs State of U.P.

Shahid Baig Vs State of U.P.