Allowed

Sunil Kumar Patel v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC21 Nov 2022BAIL/41989/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge allowed the bail application of Sunil Kumar Patel in a criminal case involving IPC offences and SC/ST Act provisions. The court relied on the absence of injuries on the informant and contradictory statements to grant bail subject to personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail after personal bond and two sureties in the like amount.

Sunil Kumar Patel Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41989 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Patel Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhir Kumar Upadhyay, Sriprakash Rai

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Sudhir Kumar Upadhyay, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arun Kumar Pandey, the learned Additional Government Advocate and perused the record.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 432 of 2017, under Sections 354, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Section 7/8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Section 3 (2) (va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Police Station Rabartsganj, District Sonebhadra during pendency of the trial in the Court below.

¶8

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 08.08.2017 against the applicant and one Sandeep Yadav alleging that on 07.08.2017, the informant was at the home of her maternal grand mother and both the accused persons entered her maternal grand mother's home and started molesting the informant; that when she resisted and raised hue and cry several villagers came there. She further alleged that when the informant's brothers asked the accused persons about the incident, they had beaten up the informant's brother.

¶9

In her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the informant reiterated the F.I.R. version. In her medico legal examination, no mark of any injury was found on her body and she only complained of pain in her left fore-arm. In the statement of informant's grand mother, she categorically stated that the informant was not present at her home on the date of incident.

¶10

In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case and that he has no criminal history.

¶11

Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate has

¶12

opposed the prayer for grant of bail.

¶13

Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and submissions and keeping in view particularly the fact that in the medico legal examination report of the informant, no injury has been found on her body and her maternal grand mother has stated that the informant was not present at her home on the date of the incident and also keeping in view the fact that the applicant has no criminal history, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail

¶14

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

¶15

Let the applicant Sunil Kumar Patel be released on bail in Case Crime No. 432 of 2017, under Sections 354, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Section 7/8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Section 3 (2) (va) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Police Station Rabartsganj, District Sonebhadra 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:-

¶16

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

¶17

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶18

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

¶19

(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.

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 21.11.2022 Jaswant

¶22

Digitally signed by JASWANT KUMAR Date: 2022.11.23 10:30:07 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sunil Kumar Patel v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Kumar Patel 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

Hariom Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rahul Sarswat Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neeraj Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Rakesh Kumar Patel Vs State of U.P.

Begraj Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Paswan Vs State of U.P.