Allowed

Sugendra v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC16 Nov 2022BAIL/29983/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed bail to applicant in a Section 376 IPC case. While noting alleged inconsistencies in victim's statement and hostileness, court concluded a case for bail was made out without expressing opinion on merits, imposing standard conditions to prevent tampering with evidence and intimidation.

What did the court decide?

Releasement on bail on personal bond and two local sureties subject to conditions of no tampering, no intimidation of witnesses, and regular appearance in court.

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

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29983 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sugendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Juned Alam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No. 118/2022, under Section 376 IPC, police station Pataherwa, District Kushi Nagar with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶7

It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the accused-applicant is innocent and he has not committed any offence. It was submitted that the first information report was lodged by the informant against applicant and one Golu and Village Pradhan alleging that applicant has enticed away her minor daughter. It was further submitted that in her statement, recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., victim girl has merely alleged that applicant did 'chhedchhar' with her and there was no allegation of rape. In her statement, recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., victim girl has developed a new version that applicant has committed rape upon her. Referring to the facts of the matter, it was submitted that the allegations made by victim are thoroughly false. It was submitted that statements of complainant as well as of victim girl have already been recorded before the trial court, copies of which have been annexed along with the supplementary affidavit. In her statement, recorded before the trial court, the victim has denied

¶8

the prosecution version and turned hostile. She has clearly stated that applicant has not committed any rape upon her. It was further submitted that though as per educational record, the age of victim has been shown 17 years but in fact she is a major girl. It has further been argued that the applicant is in judicial custody since 16.04.2022, having no criminal history and that in case, applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail .

¶10

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegations, period of custody and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that a case for bail is made out. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant Sugendra involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:

¶12

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial.

¶13

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.

¶14

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

¶15

The applicant will not try to contact, threat or otherwise influence the complainant or any of the witness of the case.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of applicant in accordance with law.

¶17

Order Date :- 16.11.2022

¶18

Anand

¶19

Digitally signed by ANAND VERMA Date: 2022.11.19 10:51:52 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sugendra v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sugendra 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

Garima Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rahul Vs State of U.P.and Another

Smt. Shanti Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nikhil Raikawar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Juned Vs State of U.P. and Another

Hari Babu Tyagi Vs State of U.P. and Anothers