Allowed

Ankush v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC29 Nov 2022BAIL/29298/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court granted bail to the applicant accused of rape and child sexual offences. The grant was supported by the victim's denial of the charge in her u/s 164 Cr.P.C. statement, her declaration as hostile during trial, and the applicant's lack of criminal history.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties subject to undertaking not to seek adjournments, appear in court, and adhere to specific conditions of stay of proceedings.

Ankush Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29298 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Ankush Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Satya Prakash,Raj Kumar Yadav,Sayeed Saif Ullah,Sufia Saba Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Gaurav Pundir

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today in Court, is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Gaurav Pundir, learned counsel for the first informant and perused the record.

¶7

This bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No. 122 of 2022, under Sections 376, 323 IPC and 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Biharigarh, DistrictSaharanpur.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that first information report has been lodged by the victim's mother, in which it is alleged that on 6.5.2022 a.m., the applicant had enticed her away daughter and committed rape on her.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has next drawn the attention of the Court to the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., in which she has categorically stated that on 6.5.2022, there was some quarrel between victim's mother and family members of the applicant and as such, applicant had hit her with a brick, however her mother lodged false report against him on the basis of cooked up and concocted allegation. She has further categorically stated that the applicant had not committed any indecent act with her and she is a student of class- X and do not want to pursue the present case and she has further categorically stated that the said statement has been given out of her own free-will without any coercion and undue influence.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has next drawn the attention of the Court to the statement of the victim's mother shown to be

¶12

recorded during the course of trial, in which she has categorically stated that on account of some quarrel, she had lodged first information report which was not even read to her and the applicant has not committed any rape with her daughter nor had assaulted her and she has been declared hostile. On her attention being drawn to her statement shown to be recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she has categorically stated that she has not given any such statement to the police.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that the applicant is in jail since 8.5.2022 and has no criminal history to his credit. The applicant has regularly been cooperating in the process of trial. There is no chance of applicant fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses, as such, he be released on bail.

¶14

Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as counsel for the first informant has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the fact that in the statement shown to be recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the victim herself has categorically stated that no rape was committed on her and said first information report was lodged on the basis of cooked up and concocted allegation by her mother on account of the fact that the applicant had hit her by a brick. Further even during the course of trial, the statement of P.W.-1- mother of the victim and the first informant has been recorded, however she has not supported the prosecution story at all and has been declared hostile. In cross examination also she has denied to have given any such statement to the police shown to be recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C.

¶15

Having considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for both the parties and on perusal of the record, it is evident that first information report has been lodged by the victim's mother, in which it is alleged that on 6.5.2022 a.m., the applicant had enticed her away daughter and committed rape on her. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she has categorically stated that on 6.5.2022, there was some quarrel between victim's mother and family members of the applicant and as such, applicant had hit her with a brick, however her mother lodged false report against him on the basis of cooked up and concocted allegation. She has further categorically stated that the applicant had not committed any indecent act with her and she is a student of class- X and do not want to pursue the present case and she has further categorically stated that the said statement has been given out of her own free-will without any coercion and undue influence. In the statement of the victim's mother shown to be recorded during the course of trial, she has categorically stated that on account

¶16

of some quarrel, she had lodged first information report which was not even read to her and the applicant has not committed any rape on her daughter nor had assaulted her and she has been declared hostile. On her attention being drawn to her statement shown to be recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she has categorically stated that she has not given any such statement to the police.

¶17

Furthermore, the applicant is in jail since 8.5.2022 and has no criminal history to his credit and there is no chance of applicant fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. In the backdrop of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, prima facie a case for bail is made out.

¶18

Let the applicant- Ankush be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶19

(1). 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.

¶20

(2). 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 IPC.

¶21

(3). 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 IPC.

¶22

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

¶23

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶24

It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.

¶25

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶26

The bail application is accordingly allowed.

¶27

Order Date :- 29.11.2022 KU

¶28

Digitally signed by KALIM UDDIN SIDDIQUI Date: 2022.11.29 17:20:01 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ankush v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ankush 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dinesh Kumar @ Kallu Vs State of U.P.

Smt Dropati Vs State of U.P.

Smt Munni Devi Vs State of U.P.

Anwari Begum Vs State of U.P.

Sachin Vs State of U.P.

Manish Kumar Vs State of U.P.