Allowed

Dhanji Turaha v. State of U.P and 3 Others

Allahabad HC22 Mar 2022BAIL/4632/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge court allowed bail to the accused applicant Dhanji Turaha in a criminal case involving IPC 363, 366A and POCSO Act offences, noting lack of victim corroboration and low flight risk, subject to bond and conditions.

What did the court decide?

Accused applicant to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties subject to conditions of not tampering with witnesses, cooperating in trial, and avoiding criminal activity.

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

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4632 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Dhanji Turaha Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Kameshwar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.

¶5

Counter Affidavit filed by the State is taken on record.

¶6

Perusal of the record would reveal that in compliance of the order dated 16.2.2022 of this Court, notice was issued to opposite party no.2- victim of the crime and as per the record of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ballia, the same has been served, however, no one is present on behalf of opposite party no.2.

¶7

Heard Shri Kameshwar Singh, learned counsel for the accusedapplicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

This bail application has been moved on behalf of the accusedapplicant/ Dhanji Turaha for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 114 of 2021, under Section 363, 366A IPC and Section 16/17 of POCSO Act, Police Station Sahatwar, District Ballia, during pendency of trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that the accused-applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. He has not committed any offence as claimed by the prosecution.

¶10

It is further submitted that first information report of the instant case has been lodged by the informant, mother of the victim, on account of some misconception with a delay of about nine days. However, the victim is reported to have been recovered after one month and ten days on 17.09.2021 and in her statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C., she has not supported the version of the prosecution and has not imputed any allegation against the applicant.

¶11

It is further submitted that charge-sheet in this case has already been filed but the applicant is languishing in jail in this case since 17.09.2021 and there is no likelihood that the accusedapplicant after release on bail may flee from the process of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. on the other hand opposed the bail application and submits that having regard to the nature of the offence, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶13

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the considered view that applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the accused-applicant/ Dhanji Turaha involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶15

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶16

(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶17

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶19

Order Date :- 22.3.2022

¶20

SFH

¶21

Digitally signed by SYED FAHIM HUSAIN Date: 2022.03.23 12:50:21 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Dhanji Turaha v. State of U.P and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhanji Turaha 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

Shanu Vs State of U.P.

Manish Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Kishan Yadav @ Krishna Vs State of U.P.

Nitin Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Dhruv Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Aashif Qureshi Vs State of Up.