Allowed

Narendra Chauhan@ Apachi v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC20 Dec 2021BAIL/41877/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to the applicant in a criminal case involving offences u/s 363, 376(iii) IPC and POCSO. The court noted a conflict between the age of the prosecutrix stated in the FIR (18) and school records (age 14). Without commenting on merits, the court held a case for bail was made out considering the FIR age.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail upon executing personal bond and two sureties.

Narendra Chauhan@ Apachi Vs State of U.P. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41877 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Narendra Chauhan@ Apachi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Chandra Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.

¶5

Heard over bail application moved by the applicant, Narendra Chauhan@ Apachi, in Case Crime No. 90 of 2021, under Sections-363, 376 (iii) I.P.C. and Section 5/6 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offence Act, Police Station-Khajani, District-Gorakhpur.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA representing the State. Perused the record.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number and is languishing in jail since 13.07.2021; he is of no criminal antecedent; prosecutrix was said to be 18 years of age in First Information Report, itself and she had said her age to be of 18 years; nothing incriminating is there against the applicant in her statement under Section 161 as well as 164 Cr.P.C.; it was a voluntarily and consensual fleeing then after marrying with the applicant; according to Kutumb Register of the village she is of 19 years; she was pregnant by the applicant as has been admitted by herself; there is no likelihood of applicant's fleeing from course of justice or tempering with evidence in case of release on bail; hence bail has been prayed for.

¶8

Shri Amit Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned AGA has vehemently opposed bail with this contention that as per school record date of birth of the prosecutrix is 31.08.2008 and no where it has been said in bail application that there was marriage in between and the conception if of applicant.

¶9

Having heard learned counsel for both the parties, gone through the material placed on record it is apparent that the mother of the prosecutrix, in First Information Report, itself has said age to be 18 years and the same is in

¶10

accordance with Kutumb Register, and considering the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction but without commenting on the merits of the case, a case for bail is made out, accordingly allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant, Narendra Chauhan@ Apachi , involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶12

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶13

The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶14

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

¶15

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

¶16

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

¶17

Order Date :- 20.12.2021 Deepak/

Narendra Chauhan@ Apachi v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Narendra Chauhan@ Apachi 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pradeep @ Kaley Vs State of U.P.

Rahul Nagar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kamal Prasad Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sachin Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Anand Vs State of U.P.

Kunnu Yadav @ Navneet Yadav and 2 others Vs State of Up.