Allowed

Rahul Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC31 Aug 2022BAIL/11150/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed bail to the applicant, Rahul Kumar, accused in a Section 3/4 POCSO Act case. The victim was handed over to his family and resides with him, while the applicant has no prior criminal history. The Court framed bail conditions to prevent tampering and intimidation.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions against tampering, intimidation, and re-offending.

Rahul Kumar Vs State of U.P. — Child Custody and Guardianship | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11150 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rahul Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shujauddin Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Jitendra Kumar

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for complainant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶6

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case by the informant for enticing his niece. At the time of alleged incident, victim was major and she stated her age about 18 years in her statement before the Magistrate recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. She further stated that she went with the applicant voluntarily and she lived with him at Phaphamau in a rented room. She was in love affair with the applicant. It is also submitted that now, the victim has been handed over to the family of this applicant from Nari Niketan. There is no criminal history against the applicant. He is languishing in jail since 29.10.2020 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for complainant as well as learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but acceded the fact that victim has been handed over to the family of this applicant and is living there.

¶8

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, the age of the victim and her willingness and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶9

Let the applicant Rahul Kumar involved in Case Crime No. 16 of 2020, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. G.R.P., District Fatehpur be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

¶10

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶11

The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶12

The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶13

The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶14

The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶15

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶16

Order Date :- 31.8.2022 A. Singh

¶17

Digitally signed by ANURAG SINGH Date: 2022.09.02 16:07:03 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rahul Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Kumar 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Naresh Vs State of U.P.

Vipin and Another Vs State of U.P and 3 Others

Smt Krishna Devi Vs State of U.P.

Umesh @ Pappu Saroj Vs State of U.P.

Fazil Vs State of U.P.

Sukhraj Singh Alias Sukkha Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others