Allowed

Tippu @ Ram Ratan v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC22 Nov 2022BAIL/28070/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by an accused in a case involvingsectional offences under IPC and POCSO, citing lack of physical injuries to the minor victim and discrepancies in the investigation record as grounds for release on bail without recording merits.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail subject to two sureties and conditions regarding tampering with evidence, influencing witnesses, and court appearances.

Tippu @ Ram Ratan Vs State of U.P. and 3… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28070 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Tippu @ Ram Ratan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Kamlesh Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

1.Heard Sri Kamlesh Singh, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shashi Shekhar Tiwari, the learned Additional Government Advocate and perused the record.

¶6

2.The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 167 of 2022, under Sections 377, 341, 504 IPC, and 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act and Section 5m/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Chhibramau, District Kannauj.

¶7

3.The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an FIR lodged on 29.03.2022, alleging that the applicant had sodomised the informant's son aged about 11 years after gagging his mouth with cloth and tying his hands with a rope.

¶8

4.The medico-legal examination report of the informant's son mentions no injury on any part of his body.

¶9

5.In the statement of the victim recorded before the doctor, who conducted his medio-legal examination as also in his statement recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., he reiterated the FIR allegations but at the same time, he stated that although, his mouth has been gagged by the cloth, he kept saying that he will tell about the incident to his father.

¶10

6.It has been averred in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application that the applicant is an innocent person, he has been falsely implicated in the case, he is having no previous criminal history and he is in jail since 29.03.2022. It has also been stated in the affidavit that there is no possibility of the applicant tampering with any evidence and in such circumstances, the applicant is entitled for bail. It is also stated in the affidavit that the applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail and he will fully cooperate in the investigation.

¶11

7.The State has filed a counter affidavit stating that although the anul swab taken from the victim's body was sent for being

¶12

examined, the report of the test is not available till date.

¶13

8.Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for grant of bail, but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the matter.

¶14

9.Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances and keeping in view the fact that the FIR allegations are not supported by the medico-legal examination report of the victim as no injury has been found on his body and the aforesaid discrepancies in the FIR allegations and the statement that the victim pointed out in the preceding paragraphs, without recording any findings on merits of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail.

¶15

10.In light of the preceding discussion and without making any observation on the merit of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶16

11.Let the applicant Tippu @ Ram Ratan be released on bail in Case Crime No. 167 of 2022, under Sections 377, 341, 504 IPC, and 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act and Section 5m/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Chhibramau, District Kannauj on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below, subject to the following conditions:-

¶17

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶18

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶19

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

¶20

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶21

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

¶22

Order Date :- 22.11.2022 Ashish Pd.

¶23

Digitally signed by ASHISH PRASAD Date: 2022.11.24 17:20:33 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Tippu @ Ram Ratan v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tippu @ Ram Ratan v. State of U.P. 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 Patel Vs State of U.P.

Begraj Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Paswan Vs State of U.P.

Reetu Singh Vs State of U.P.

Ravindra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Mintu Prasad Vs State of U.P.