Allowed

Mithun v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Dept. of Home, Civil Sectt. Lko and 3 Others

Allahabad HC24 Mar 2023/553/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a bail application for an applicant accused of sexual offences against a minor. Bail was granted due to discrepancies in the informant's statements regarding police pressure and settlement, creating prima facie doubt.

What did the court decide?

Order allowing the application and releasing the applicant on bail on personal bond with two sureties.

Mithun Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 16

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 553 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Mithun Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Dept. Of Home, Civil Sectt. Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Vyas Narayan Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dharmendra Kumar Trivedi

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Vyas Narayan Shukla, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vipul Gupta, the learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Dharmendra Kumar Trivedi, the learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.

¶6

The instant application has been filed seeking bail for the applicant in Case Crime no. 447 of 2022, under Section 363, 366, 376-D, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, registered at Police Station Salon, District Raebareli.

¶7

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of F.I.R. lodged on 29.08.2022 in furtherance of an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. filed on 10.06.2022 alleging that the applicant and his uncle Chandrika Prasad alias Bhola alleging that both the accused persons had enticed away the informant's daughter aged about 15 years and both of them raped the informant's daughter. Upon returning, she told about the incident. The F.I.R. further alleges that the informant gave information of the incident at Police Station Salon, District Raebareli, but the police did not take any action against the accused persons rather it made the parties enter into a settlement.

¶8

In the affidavit filed in support of the 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.

¶9

The medico legal examination of the alleged victim was conducted on 07.09.2022 and no opinion has been given by the doctor regarding the alleged offence.

¶10

In the statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she reiterated the F.I.R. allegations but she stated that she could not tell about the place where the accused persons had taken her and had committed the offence. A similar allegation has been levelled by the victim while giving the statements under Section 164 Cr.P.C.

¶11

The learned A.G.A. has filed a counter affidavit, the medico legal examination report annexed therewith mentions " no injury mark ". Although samples were sent for pathological examination, nothing has been stated in this regard in the counter affidavit.

¶12

The informant has also filed a counter affidavit, wherein he has resiled from his own stand taken in the F.I.R. that the police had made them to enter into a compromise. He stated that he had not entered into any compromise.

¶13

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that in the F.I.R., the informant has alleged that the incident is alleged to have taken place on 10.06.2022; that the accused persons are uncle and nephew; that the F.I.R. alleges that when the informant went to the police station, the police pressurized him to enter into a settlement with accused persons; that in the statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C., the F.I.R. version has been supported whereas in the counter affidavit, the informant has denied her own version in the F.I.R. and has

¶14

stated that he had not enter into any settlement, the aforesaid discrepancies in the statement taken by the informant himself raised a prima facie doubt which, without affecting the merits of the case, is sufficient for making out a case for enlargement of the applicant on bail in the aforesaid case.

¶15

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed.

¶16

Let the applicant Mithun be released on bail in Case Crime no. 447 of 2022, under Section 363, 366, 376-D, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, Act, registered at Police Station Salon, District Raebareli on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions: -

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)

¶22

Order Date :- 24.3.2023 Preeti.

¶23

Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mithun v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Dept. of Home, Civil Sectt. Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mithun v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Dept. of Home, Civil Sectt. 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

Vinay Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Civil Secrett. Lko. and 3 Others

Avaneesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Prakash Kumar Sinha Vs Central Bureau of Investigation

Rustam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Dept. Home Lko.

Ankur Rastogi @ Shakti Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Kamaal Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko