Allowed

Krishna Kumar @ Kanihya v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC5 Sept 2022BAIL/29412/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment considers a bail application for enticement and sexual offences under POCSO and IPC. The court found the case against the applicant weak, citing the victim's voluntary presence, lack of medical evidence of injury, and no criminal record, allowing bail with standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions against tampering, intimidating witnesses, and committing similar offences.

Krishna Kumar @ Kanihya Vs State of U.P. and… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29412 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Krishna Kumar @ Kanihya Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Bhupendra Kuamr Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, 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 for enticing the daughter of the informant. Victim was major at the time of alleged incident and went with him voluntarily to Kerala where they lived for one month. When they were returning to their home, police arrested them. Statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. before the learned Magistrate in which she stated clearly that she went with the applicant voluntarily without any pressure and she lived in Kerala with the applicant and no any force or pressure was used against her by the applicant. The age of the victim is said to be more than 16 years and she was major but to conceal the fact of age, no medical examination was got done for determination of her age. During medical examination, no any sign of sexual assault or internal injury was found on the person of the victim. He is languishing in jail since 18.12.2021, having no criminal antecedent and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶7

Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail.

¶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 Krishna Kumar @ Kanihya involved in Case Crime No. 683 of 2021, under Sections 363, 376 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Seohara, District Bijnor 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 :- 5.9.2022 A. Singh

¶17

Digitally signed by ANURAG SINGH Date: 2022.09.07 16:03:23 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Krishna Kumar @ Kanihya v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishna Kumar @ Kanihya 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

Vilal Vs State of U.P.

Vishambhar Vs State of U.P.

Veekesh @ Dp Vs State of U.P.

Dharmendra Alias Kedi Vs State of U.P.

Parma Vs State of U.P.

Veerpal Vs State of U.P.