Allowed

Hari Kumar Chauhan v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC24 May 2022BAIL/7219/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a bail application filed by Hari Kumar Chauhan charged with offences under IPC Sections 363, 366, 376 and POCSO Sections 5/6. The court considered the applicant's plea regarding the victim's age and lack of corroboration but held it as a fit case for bail pursuant to Data Ram precedent without expressing an opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with personal bond and two sureties upon executing conditions regarding non-tampering and appearing in court.

Hari Kumar Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and 3… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 85

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7219 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Hari Kumar Chauhan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Kumar Pandey,Dinesh Kumar Pandey,Sunil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

The Court has been informed that notice upon the informant has been served but no one has appeared on his behalf.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.

¶7

This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Hari Kumar Chauhan in connection with Case Crime No.364 of 2021, under Sections 363, 366, 376 of Indian Penal Code and Section 5/6 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station Ramgarh Tal, district Gorakhpur.

¶8

The first information report of this incident was lodged by informant against applicant. It was alleged in the first information report that applicant had enticed away the minor daughter of the informant 3-4 days ago, who was said to be 16 years of age.

¶9

The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with the ulterior motive. He submitted that alleged victim was in consensual relations with applicant. He submitted that radiological age of alleged victim was found to be 17 years, copy whereof has been annexed on page no.39 of the paper book and considering the margin of two years the alleged victim was major. He submitted that alleged victim has not supported prosecution version in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., in which she has specifically said that she knew the applicant since last two years and she was not enticed away by anyone. He submitted that applicant is languishing in jail since 07.09.2021, hence he is entitled to be released on bail and he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail plea.

¶11

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, submission of learned counsel for the parties, considering the law laid down in the case of Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2018 (3), SCC, 2 , but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.

¶12

Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant Hari Kumar Chauhan involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on executing a personal bond and

¶14

furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶15

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶16

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses;

¶17

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

¶18

iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission;

¶19

v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶20

Order Date :- 24.5.2022

¶21

R./

¶22

Digitally signed by RAJEEV KUMAR SACHDEVA Date: 2022.05.26 18:34:55 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Hari Kumar Chauhan v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hari Kumar Chauhan 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rashid Vs State of U.P through Its Secretary Home Up at Lucknow

Smt. Ramrati Vs State of U.P.

Himanshu Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Samad Vs State of U.P.

Mohasim @ Chanda Qureshi Vs State of U.P.

Pratap Narayan @ Pratap and Another Vs State of U.P.