The High Court granted bail application filed by an accused charged with offences under IPC and POCSO Act involving a minor. Considering the age of the prosecutrix and presumption under POCSO Act, the court deemed it a non-fit case for bail.
Bail application rejected; trial to be concluded within six months.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 10 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2102 of 2022
Applicant :- Shivam Chaurasia Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Shivam Chaurasia S/o Late Om Prakash Chaurasia seeking bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.621 of 2021, under Sections 363/366/342/352/376/506/328, IPC and Section 5/6, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station Thakurganj, District Lucknow.
Prosecutrix was a Class-IXth student, aged around 13 years, at the time of incident. Allegation against the accused-applicant is that he enticed the prosecutrix away and when she went to the Studio of the accused-applicant, he offered some biscuits to her and after consuming the biscuits she became unconscious and the accused-applicant raped her and made a video. On the threat of making the video viral the accused-applicant repeatedly raped the prosecutrix, a minor girl aged around 13-14 years.
The prosecutrix stand throughout has been consistent. Even in the evidence recorded before the court in cross-examination she has tropically stated the incident on various dates.
Looking at the adolescent age of the prosecutrix, who was hardly 13-14 years of age at the time of incident, and the allegation against the accused-applicant that he blackmailed her for several months and exploited her continuously and also considering the presumption under section 29 of the POCSO Act this court does not deem it to be a fit case to enlarge the accused-applicant on bail. The bail application is hereby rejected .
The trial court is directed to proceed with the trial proceedings expeditiously and conclude the same preferably within a period of six months.
If despite full cooperation by the accused-applicant the trial court is not able to complete the trial, accused-applicant may revive the bail plea if he is so advised.
Order Date :- 8.12.2022/A.Nigam
Digitally signed by ANUJ NIGAM Date: 2022.12.13 18:20:42 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the accused-applicant is fit for bail in a heinous offence involving a minor under the POCSO Act.
Whether the presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act makes this case a fit case for bail.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Shivam Chaurasia
State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko And Others
Dinesh Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
