Allowed

Arun @ Jahreele Sonkar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Jul 2022BAIL/8765/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Bail Application filed by Arun @ Jahreele Sonkar in connection with a POCSO case involving sexual assault and obscene acts. The court allowed the bail application, observing it to be a fit case, without expressing an opinion on merits of the disclosures.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties.

Arun @ Jahreele Sonkar Vs State of U.P. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 77

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8765 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Arun @ Jahreele Sonkar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A., Jagadish Prasad Yadav

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri J.S.Yadav, learned counsel for the informant and the learned A.G.A.

¶6

This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Arun @ Jahreele in connection with Case Crime No.265 of 2021, under Sections 354, 354-B, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. & 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station Aurai, district Bhadohi.

¶7

The first information report of this incident was lodged by the informant against three named accused persons including the applicant. It was alleged in the first information report that on 28.10.2021 at about 4:40 p.m. when the informant's daughter was returning from Coaching, the named accused persons after catching hold the hands of the informant's daughter dragged her near the house of Lalman Sokha. It was also alleged that upon hearing the screaming of the informant's daughter, informant and his family members reached there. The accused persons attacked the informant and other family members, in which the informant and his wife sustained injuries. The accused persons threatened the informant with dire consequences.

¶8

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 informant and the accused side are resident of the same village. He submitted that neither the incident was seen by any independent witness nor any one had witnessed the incident. He submitted that most of the offences are punishable below seven years. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 01.11.2021, hence he is entitled to be released on bail and he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. have opposed the bail plea.

¶10

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.

¶11

Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant Arun @ Jahreele involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission;

¶16

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.

¶17

Order Date :- 6.7.2022

¶18

R./

¶19

Digitally signed by RAJEEV KUMAR SACHDEVA Date: 2022.07.07 12:27:04 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Arun @ Jahreele Sonkar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun @ Jahreele Sonkar 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sami Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Jasdeep Singh Sahdev @ Gagan Vs State of U.P.

Hamid Hussain Vs State of U.P.

Shivakant Pandey @ Bheiyan Vs State of U.P.

Ved Prakash@ Om Prakash Vs State of U.P.

Krishna @ Krishna Nand Vishwakarma Vs State of U.P.