Allowed

Laxman v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy.Home and 3 Others

Allahabad HC23 May 2023/231/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to the applicant in an FIR registered under Section 376 IPC and POCSO Act. The court relied on the victim's statement indicating a consensual relationship and the applicant's lack of criminal history, granting release on personal bond and two sureties subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount, subject to conditions against tampering with evidence or witnesses and appearing in court.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:36373

¶2

Court No. - 16

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 231 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Laxman Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy.Home And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar,Shaunak Singh,Suhail Kashif Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Amit Kumar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the State and perused the records.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 421 of 2022, under Section 376 IPC & 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Safdarganj, District Barabanki.

¶8

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 10.09.2022 against one Pratap and two other persons, stating that all the three persons forcibly took her a jungle and raped her.

¶9

In the affidavit filed in support of bail application it has been stated that the applicant is innocent, he has been falsely implicated in the present case and he has no criminal history.

¶10

The State has filed a counter affidavit annexing therewith copies of the material collected during investigation.

¶11

In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. she stated that she knows the applicant for the past two years and she herself had made a phone call to the applicant at about 01:00 am on 08.09.2022 and she had gone with the applicant. However, when the applicant had came to drop her back at abot 04:00 a.m., her younger brother saw her and, therefore, she again ran away and gone to the applicant.

¶12

She categorically stated that she loves the applicant and she wants to marry him and the other two persons have been falsely implicated in the present case.

¶13

In the statement of the informant's mother recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. also she reiterated her earlier version.

¶14

The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but he could not dispute the aforesaid aspects of the matter.

¶15

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the consistent stand of the victim that the applicant has not committed any misdeed with her, coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 23.09.2022, I am of the view that the aforesaid facts are sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime.

¶16

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed.

¶17

Let the applicant-Laxman be released on bail in Case Crime No. 421 of 2022, under Section 376 IPC & 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Safdarganj, District Barabanki on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

Order Date :- 23.5.2023 Pradeep/-

¶23

Digitally signed by :- PRADEEP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Laxman v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy.Home and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Laxman v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy.Home 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

Manjesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Govt. U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Vijay Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Secrt. Lko.

Deepak Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Civil Lko. and 3 Others

Maroof Vs State of U.P.Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and 3 Others

Brij Kumar @ Bhullu Vs State of U.P. through Principal Secretary, Home Deptt., Lucknow

Ram Manorath Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy. Home