Allowed

Suraj @ Arif v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC13 Jul 2023/234/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was allowed. The court noted variance in the victim's statements and lack of concrete age material. With the applicant having no criminal record and being in custody, the court directed his release on a personal bond with two sureties.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Suraj @ Arif released on bail subject to personal bond and two sureties, undertaking to attend hearings and not interfere with evidence.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:45663

¶2

Court No. - 11

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 234 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Suraj @ Arif Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shailesh Kumar Singh,Ravinder Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.

¶7

The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.543 of 2021 under sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and section 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Kotwali Sadar, District Lakhimpur Kheri.

¶8

It is argued that initially the first information report was registered against the applicant under section 363 IPC. Subsequently, in the statement under sections 161, the victim did not support the prosecution story and stated that she had gone out of her own free will, however, in the statement under section 164 Cr.P.C., the victim stated that she was enticed away by the applicant on the pretext of marriage. It is also argued that the issue with regard to age shall be considered at the time of trial. The applicant is in custody since 23.06.2021 and has no criminal antecedents.

¶9

Considering the variance in the statement of the victim under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C and there is no concrete material with regard to age coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is in jail since 23.06.2021, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. Thus the bail application is allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant Suraj @ Arif be released on bail in aforesaid first information report number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below concerned with the following conditions:

¶11

(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;

¶12

(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and

¶13

(c) 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶14

Order Date :- 13.7.2023 VNP/-

¶15

Digitally signed by :- VISHVANATH PRASAD SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Suraj @ Arif v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj @ Arif v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rishabh Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Lko. and 3 Others

Chhathiram Verma Alias Nankan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. Lko.

Wahid Ali Vs Narcotics Control Bureau Lucknow

Rajesh Agrahari @ Pintu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Civil Secrett. Lko.

Santosh Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Dept. Lko.

Bodhraj Alias Bojhey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and 3 Others