Allowed

Sandeep v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC8 Sept 2022BAIL/14097/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants bail to the applicant in a case involving kidnapping and rape charges against a minor. The court observes that the victim's supplementary affidavit states no physical relation was established, though she was examined at the trial level. The court notes the applicant lacks criminal antecedents and is willing to surrender bail. No specific conditions are imposed other than standard

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to standard conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14097 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Sandeep Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Kumar Yadav,Atmaram Nadiwal,Ram Sumer Chaudhary,Sachchida Nand Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Santosh Kumar Mishra

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶5

List has been revised. Learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A is present. No one is present from the side of complainant.

¶6

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

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that he is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case for enticing the minor daughter of the informant for committing rape with her. Further submitted that the applicant has committed no offence but on account of dispute between the parties, he has been roped in this case with false allegation. It is also submitted that the trial is going on and the victim has already been examined before learned trial court as P.W-1 filed through supplementary affidavit in which she has stated that this applicant neither enticed her nor established physical relation but on account of dispute, the F.I.R was lodged by her parents. Even during cross examination nothing was found in support of prosecution version. He is languishing in jail since 14.11.2018 as having no any criminal antecedent and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶8

On the other hand, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and acceded the fact that P.W-1 as aforesaid has been recorded before the learned trial court .

¶9

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties 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.

¶10

Let the applicant- Sandeep, involved in Case Crime

¶11

No.710 of 2018, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C and 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Kotwali, District Mahrajganj 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.

¶12

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

¶13

The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶14

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

¶15

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.

¶16

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.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 8.9.2022 G.S

¶19

Digitally signed by GHAN SHYAM Date: 2022.09.14 16:08:05 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sandeep v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep 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

Vinod Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Arun Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Prabhakar @ Bablu Vs State of U.P.

Ajay Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Rama Devi Vs State of U.P.

Shakeel @ Mirchu Vs State of U.P. and Another