Allowed

Deepak Kumar S/O Sri Sharman v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Allahabad HC22 Dec 2022/6793/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. regarding allegations of enticement and sexual intercourse under POCSO and IPC, the High Court granted bail despite opposition. The court ordered the release of the applicant on a personal bond and two sureties, imposing specific conditions regarding court attendance and avoiding abuse of the liberty granted.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail executing a personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions including mandatory court attendance and no adjournment.

Deepak Kumar S/O Sri Sharman Vs State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 10

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6793 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Deepak Kumar S/O Sri Sharman Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Alok Kumar Singh,Sanjay Singh Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vikas Sharma

¶4

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.394 of 2021, under Sections 363 and 376 IPC and Section 5J(2)/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Sandi, District Hardoi.

¶7

It is alleged that the accused-applicant on 20.6.2021 enticed away the prosecutrix, aged around 15 years. The prosecutrix was recovered on 16.7.2021 and her statement has been recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. in which she said that on 20.6.2021 without informing her parents at around 8.30 PM she came to Bangarmau by Tempo and from there, she went with the accused-applicant to Haryana by bus. They stayed there and when she was coming back, the police caught hold of her. The prosecutrix in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. said that she on her own, went with the accused-applicant and established physical relation with the accused-applicant out of her choice and volition. The prosecutrix got pregnant and at the time of her medical examination, the pregnancy was found to be of three months. However, she aborted the fetus.

¶8

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the prosecutrix is married to someone else. She has not made any allegation of rape against the accused-applicant. Accusedapplicant has been in jail since 23.7.2021.

¶9

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but not disputed the aforesaid facts.

¶10

Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, coupled with the contentions raised by the learned counsel for both sides, and without entering into the merit of the case, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶11

Let applicant Deepak Kumar be released on bail in the above case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶12

(i) The applicant 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 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 misuses the liberty of bail during trial 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.

¶15

(iv) 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 absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall

¶16

be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶17

Order Date :- 22.12.2022 Rao/-

¶18

Digitally signed by :- CHEBROLU SRINIVASA RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Deepak Kumar S/O Sri Sharman v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak Kumar S/O Sri Sharman v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 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

Rakesh Kumar Rawat S/O Kandhayi Rawat Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home

Ilyaas Vs State of U.P.

Salman Vs State of U.P.

Anuj Alias Anoop ( Second Bail) S/O Mandreek Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and 3 Others

Manju Devi W/O Budhi Sagar Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

Arjun @ Shan Singh Vs State of U.P. through Principal Secretary Home, Civil Secretariat, Lucknow