Allowed

Ram Sumiran Alias Lala v. the State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy.Home Deptt. Lucknow and Others

Allahabad HC1 Dec 2022/5836/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single judge allowed a bail application under Section 439 CrPC in an FIR registered under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and POCSO. The court held that since the prosecutrix was already examined, there was no risk of influencing her, thus deeming it appropriate to grant bail subject to specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local and reliable sureties each.

Ram Sumiran Alias Lala Vs the State of U.P… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 10

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5836 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Ram Sumiran Alias Lala Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy.Home Deptt. Lucknow And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Manish Mani Sharma,Mohammad Sabir

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate and gone through the entire record.

¶7

By means of this application under Section 439 CrPC, the accused-applicant seeks bail in FIR No.0166 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC read with Section 3/4 POCSO Act lodged at Police Station Dewa, Barabanki.

¶8

The FIR came to be registered on a written complaint given by mother of the prosecutrix, alleging therein that the prosecutrix, aged around 16 years, on 17.04.2022, at around 6 p.m., went missing from home; on inquiry, it could be gathered that it was the accused-applicant who enticed the prosecutrix away. Further allegation is that the prosecutrix had taken Rs.20,000/- cash kept in the home and jewellery of complainant's daughter-in-law.

¶9

Mr. Manish Mani Sharma, learned counsel for the accusedapplicant, submits that the prosecutrix has already been examined in the Court; engagement between the prosecutrix and the accused-applicant had taken place but for some reason marriage was not performed; the prosecutrix went with the accused-applicant with cash and jewellery, as alleged; it was a consensual act, however, after the prosecutrix was recovered, she, under pressure of her parents, had given statement against the accused-applicant.

¶10

Considering the fact that the prosecutrix has already been examined in the Court and there is no chance for the accusedapplicant to influence her and also taking into consideration other facts such as engagement of the prosecutrix with the accused-applicant and allegation that the prosecutrix went with Rs.20,000/- cash and jewellery, this Court deems it appropriate to enlarge the accused-applicant on bail.

¶11

Let applicant- Ram Sumiran alias Lala , accused of abovementioned FIR/crime number, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local and reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions, which are imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶12

(i) the applicant(s) shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law;

¶13

(ii). the applicant(s) shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code;

¶14

(iii). in case, the applicant(s) misuse(s) the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant(s) fail(s) 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; and

¶15

(iv) the applicant(s) 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.

¶16

[D.K. Singh, J.]

¶17

Order Date :- 1.12.2022

¶18

MVS/-

¶19

Digitally signed by MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN Date: 2022.12.01 18:22:44 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ram Sumiran Alias Lala v. the State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy.Home Deptt. Lucknow and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Sumiran Alias Lala v. the State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy.Home Deptt. Lucknow and Others

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

Central Bureau of Investigation Thru. S.P. A.C.B. Lucknow Vs U.O.I. Thru. Asstt. Director Enforcement Directorate Alld.

Amit Singh S/O Lalla Singh (Second Bail) Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Mayank Bajpai Vs State of U.P. through S.P. Cbi/Acb Lko.

Durgeshwar Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Superitendent of Police Cbi/Scb

Mukesh S/O Jawahar Madeshia Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home and 3 Others

Mohd. Rashid @ Abba Vs State of U.P. Through the Principal Secretary Home, civil Secretary, U.P. Government Lucknow