Allowed

Anoop v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC27 Jul 2022/4035/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to Anoop, accused of rape under POCSO and IPC Sections 376, 366. The court relied on victim's statements admitting voluntary cohabitation, lack of medical injury evidence, and cited Dataram Singh. Bail granted on personal bond with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on executing a personal bond and two sureties subject to eight specific conditions including physical appearance and cooperation.

Anoop Vs State of U.P. and Anr. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 13

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4035 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Anoop Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Tripathi,Manish Kumar Agnihotri,Vijay Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Deepak Kumar Dwivedi,Suresh Chandra Tiwari

¶4

Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.

¶5

Shri Suresh Chandra Tiwari, the learned counsel for the first informant submits that his client is not interested to file counter affidavit as he informed him several times for filing counter affidavit but he is not turning up, therefore, in absence of counter affidavit he will argue the matter on behalf of first informant.

¶6

Heard Shri Manish Kumar Agnihotri, the learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Suresh Chandra Tiwari, the learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 and Shri Aniruddha Singh, the learned A.G.A.-I for the State as well as perused the record.

¶7

The applicant, Anoop , has moved the present bail application seeking bail in Case Crime No. 278 of 2020, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. read with Section 3/4 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Manjhila, District Hardoi.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the case due to village rivalry. No such incident, as alleged by the prosecution, took place. Initially F.I.R. was lodged under Sections 363, 366, 368, 344, 506 I.P.C. against the applicant, his mother and his brother-in-law. After investigation the Investigating Officer dropped the name of mother and brother-in-law of the applicant and submitted charge sheet in a mechanical manner without considering the evidence given by the victim in her statements recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in her statement recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. the victim has stated that she went with the applicant on her own sweet will and solemnized marriage with him and they lived together as husband and wife. She has not made any allegation of rape or forceful sexual relation against the applicant.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that in her subsequent statement the victim has stated same version giver in her earlier statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. and she admits that she solemnized marriage with the applicant on her own sweet will and in the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. the victim has stated her age is 18 years and 04 months.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that allegation of rape as levelled by the prosecution got demolished from the perusal of the medical report of the victim wherein doctor has given his opinion that there is neither any internal or external injury found on the private parts of the victim, nor any dead or alive spermatozoa was seen on her vaginal smear. The radiological age of the victim was found to be 16 years.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the applicant has been implicated with malicious intention to defame the image of applicant and his family members in the society, therefore, the applicant be enlarged on bail by this Court sympathetically.

¶13

Several other submissions regarding legality and illegality of the allegations made in the F.I.R. have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused, have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. The applicant undertakes that in case he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history, which fact has been stated in para-17 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. The applicant is in jail since 02.08.2020 and that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the courts, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.

¶14

Learned A.G.A.-I as well as the learned counsel for the first informant opposed the prayer for bail by submitting that victim is minor as per her school certificate and the applicant has committed rape with the victim without her consent, therefore, his prayer for bail may be rejected.

¶15

After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the Bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of

¶16

detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence and considering the fact that the victim in her statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. and in her subsequent statement herself admitted this fact that she went with the applicant on her own sweet will and solemnized marriage with the applicant and lived with him as husband and wife and in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. admitted that her age is above 18 years, thus, she is major and knows consequences very well; and the medical report does not support allegation of rape and no external or internal injury found on the private parts of the victim and considering the larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another , reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶17

The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.

¶18

Let the applicant, Anoop , involved in Case Crime No. 278 of 2020, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. read with Section 3/4 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Manjhila, District Hardoi, be enlarged on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following conditions :-

¶19

(1) The applicant will not make any attempt to tamper with the prosecution evidence in any manner whatsoever.

¶20

(2) The applicant will personally appear on each and every date fixed in the court below and his personal presence shall not be exempted unless the court itself deems it fit to do so in the interest of justice.

¶21

(3) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶22

(4) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶23

(5) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶24

(6) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶25

(7) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad or certified copy issued from the Registry of the High Court, Allahabad.

¶26

(8) 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.

¶27

It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail.

¶28

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merit of the case.

¶29

Order Date :- 27.7.2022

¶30

Mustaqeem

¶31

Digitally signed by MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN Date: 2022.08.02 16:41:08 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Anoop v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anoop v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Diwakar Kanaujiya @ Krishna Vs State U.P.Thru. Prin. Secy.Home DEPTT.CIVIL.SECT.3.OTHERS

Yunus Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Malik Ram @ Dinesh Vs State of U.P.

Danish Vs State of U.P. through the Principal Secretary Home

Dharmendra Kumar S/O Sri Sahajram @Kallu Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Nasir Second Bail Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.