Allowed

Suresh Ahirwar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home, Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC22 Mar 2023/1472/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a bail application for an accused charged under section 376 IPC and the POCSO Act. The court found facts sufficient to grant bail without affecting the merits of the case and imposed standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions regarding tampering with evidence and appearance.

Suresh Ahirwar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 16

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1472 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Suresh Ahirwar

¶4

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home, Lko. And 3 Others

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶7

Heard Sri Arvind Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, and Sri Vipul Gupta, learned Addl. Government Advocate.

¶8

By means of the instant application the applicant Suresh Ahirwar S/o late Deen Dayal seeks bail in Case Crime No. 159 of 2022, under sections 376 IPC and section ¾, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, P.S. Sirsiya, District Shrawasti.

¶9

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of a first information report (F.IR.) lodged on 16.6.2022 against a single named accused Kavita, who is the informant's daughter-in-law, alleging that she and the informant's daughter Pooja, aged about 17 years, had gone somewhere at 7.6.2022 and they did not come back.

¶10

In the statement of the informant's daughter recorded under section 161, CrPC she stated that she is aged 18 years; She had gone with her Bhabhi to Chhatarpur; at Chhatarpur the named accused Kavita married one Ram Prasad and five days thereafter the victim/informant's daughter married the applicant and that she is living with the applicant as his wife. Before the Magistrate also the victim reiterated statement and she stated that she wants to live with the applicant only.

¶11

Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and without making any observation, which may affect the merits of the case, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the accused on bail.

¶12

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶13

Let the applicant Suresh Ahirwar S/o late Deen Dayal be released on bail in the aforesaid Case Crime No. 159 of 2022, under sections 376 IPC and section ¾, Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 , P.S. Sirsiya, District Shrawasti, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶14

(i) the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

¶15

(ii) the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;

¶16

(iii) the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶18

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

¶19

Order Date :- 22.3.2023 A.Nigam

¶20

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Suresh Ahirwar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home, Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Ahirwar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home, Lko. 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

Deepak Sonkar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Sarvesh Kashyap Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Aftab Alam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Civil Secrt. Lko. and 3 Others

Imran Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy/Addl. Chief Secy. Home

Ajaz Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home), Govt. U.P. Lok Bhawan Lko. and 3 Others

Dr. Vijay Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Civil Secrett. Lko. and Another