Allowed

Sudarshan v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC22 Aug 2022BAIL/9181/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under IPC 354 and POCSO, the High Court allowed the applicant's release, noting material contradictions in victim statements, the applicant and mother's injuries, lack of antecedents, and the bail status of co-accused.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on bail allegedly under Sections 147, 323, 325, 506 IPC and POCSO, subject to personal bond, two sureties, and restrictions on tampering with evidence or witnesses.

Sudarshan 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. - 9181 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sudarshan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Pawan Kumar Patel,Hemant Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

1.Heard Sri Hemant Kumar Srivastava, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Dinesh Kumar Srivastava, the learned Additional Government Advocate and perused the record.

¶6

2.The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 145 of 2021, under Sections 147, 323, 325, 506, 354 IPC and Section 7/8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Ghorawal, District Sonbhadra during pendency of the trial in the Court below.

¶7

3.The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. dated 04.12.2021 lodged against the applicant, his father, mother, brother and sister alleging that when the informant's minor daughter had gone to fetch water from the hand-pump near the school, the accused started teasing the informant's daughter and upon her objecting against it; the applicant started beating her and he torned away her clothes. The F.I.R. further alleges that thereafter the applicant, his father, brother, mother and sister started beating the informant's daughter and when her husband and three other persons tried to intervene, the accused persons had beaten up them also.

¶8

4.Notice of the present bail application was ordered to be issued to the informant by means of an order dated 02.06.2022 and on 13.07.2022 the In-charge Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonebhadra has sent a report that the notice has been served upon the informant personally. However, no one has put in appearance to oppose the bail application.

¶9

5.The injury reports of the informant, her daughter, one Santosh, Prabhawati, Guru Charan Jaiswal, Saroj have been annexed with the affidavit, all of whom have suffered simple injuries and Santosh and Prabhawati have suffered a fracture.

¶10

6.In the statement of the informant recorded under Section 161

¶11

Cr.P.C. she has stated that the applicant started molesting the informant's daughter and upon her opposition, he started beating her and he torned away her clothes. Her daughter came home and told about the incident and meanwhile the accused persons also came to her home and they started beating her and her family members. However, in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the informant's daughter stated that the applicant had started molesting her and upon her opposition, he had beaten her and torned her clothes and when he raised an alarm, her parents reached there; the applicant called his family members by making phone call and they started beating the victim and her family members.

¶12

7.In the statement of the alleged victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she stated that the applicant had reached the handpump on a bike alongwith two other persons. She alleged that the applicant had caught hold of her hand and when she ran towards her house, the applicant followed her and reached at the door of the victim's house. While, she was opening the door of her house, the applicant caught hold of her hand and torned away her clothes. She further stated that no beating took place at that time and the family members of the applicant as well as those of the alleged victim continued to talk for about 15-20 minutes and thereafter beating started. The alleged victim has stated that Heera Lal, a Pattidar of Buddhi Ram (the applicant's father) had mortgaged his land to the informant and Buddhi Ram is jealous of the victim's family due to this reason.

¶13

8.In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant belongs to a Scheduled Caste category whereas the informant belongs to an upper caste. On the date of the incident, the applicant was going to market with his mother on his motorcycle, his motorcycle had touched the victim's mother due to which a quarrel started and the applicant and his mother had also suffered injuries in the incident. The photocopies of the injury reports of the applicant and his mother have been annexed as Annexure No. 8 to the affidavit filed in support of the bail application as per which, both of them have suffered several injuries. It has further been stated that the applicant had given an application to the Police for lodging an F.I.R. but when no action has been taken on his application, he has filed an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. before the Special Judge (S.C./S.T.) which is still pending.

¶14

9.The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that there are serious material contradictions in the statement of the alleged victim and that of the informant recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. which makes the incident highly doubtful. He has further submitted that the applicant and his mother have

¶15

also suffered several injuries in the incident.

¶16

10.The learned counsel for the applicant has also submitted that all the other accused persons in the present case have been granted bail by means of an order dated 07.05.2022 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Sonbhadra in Bail Application No. 890 of 2022.

¶17

11.The applicant is languishing in jail since 04.01.2022.

¶18

12.Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for grant of bail.

¶19

13.Having considered the aforesaid facts and submissions and keeping in view the fact that there are serious contradictions in the statement of the alleged victim and that of the informant recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. regarding the place of occurrence, as noted above; that the applicant and his mother, both have suffered injuries in the incident; that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedent and that all the other co-accused persons have already been granted bail in the present case, I am of the view that the applicant is also entitled to be released on bail.

¶20

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

¶21

15.Let the applicant Sudarshan be released on bail in Case Crime No. 145 of 2021, under Sections 147, 323, 325, 506, 354 IPC and Section 7/8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Ghorawal, District Sonbhadra 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:-

¶22

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

¶23

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶24

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

¶25

(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.

¶26

16.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.

¶27

Order Date :- 22.8.2022 Jaswant

¶28

Digitally signed by JASWANT KUMAR Date: 2022.08.23 14:15:57 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sudarshan v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudarshan 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

Mohd. Wasim @Bhura Vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home and 3 Others

Shahzad Vs State of U.P.

Kuldeep Vs State of U.P.

Bhorik Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Sheelu Dubey Alias Sandeep Vs State of U.P.

Vinay Vs State of U.P Through Principal Secretary U.P. Lucknow