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

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:37521

Court No. - 16

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 881 of 2022

Applicant :- Akram Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Piyush Kumar Singh,Irfan Alam,Mohd. Waris Farooqui Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Piyush Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vipul Gupta, learned A.G.A. 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. 73 of 2021, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC, 3/4 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station Maharajganj Tarai, District Balrampur.

¶8

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 04.08.2021 against the applicant and two other persons, stating that on the basis of an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.c. filed on 08.07.2021, alleging that all the accused persons had enticed away the informant's daughter aged about 15 years at about 05.00 p.m. on 01.07.20221.

¶9

In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. she has stated that she loves the applicant and she had gone with him out of her own free will and that she wants to live with him only.

¶10

In the medico legal examination of the victim, her age has been opined to be 19 years.

¶11

Before the Magistrate also the victim gave similar statement and she categorically stated that the applicant did not rape her.

¶12

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.

¶13

The learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but he

¶14

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 fact that the victim is major as per her medico legal examination report and she has consistently stated that she loves the applicant and she had gone with him out of her own free will, coupled with the fact that the applicant is a young man of 24 years having no previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 28.10.2021 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 applicant on bail in the aforesaid crime.

¶16

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶17

Let the applicant- Akram be released on bail in Case Crime No. 73 of 2021, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC, 3/4 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station Maharajganj Tarai, District Balrampur on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned.

¶18

Before parting with this case, it is observed that in Hariom Sharma v. State of U.P., 2022 (120) ACC 251 , a coordinate Bench of this Court had held as under:-

¶19

"10......Neither accused nor victim or any witnesses should be permitted to subvert a criminal trial by stating falsehood and resort to contrivances, so as to make it theatre of the absurd. Dispensation of justice in a criminal trial is a serious issue and cannot be allowed to become a mockery by simply allowing prime prosecution witnesses /victims to turn hostile as a ground of acquittal. Complainants should also be accountable and should take responsibility on their shoulder.

¶20

11. Considering the societal interest, it is high time for the trial court to resort to Section 344 Cr.P.C in appropriate cases. In the present case since the prosecutrix before the trial Court has turned hostile and completely denied the prosecution version, therefore she is not entitled to the benefit of any compensation paid by the Government, which has been collected from the taxpayers of the country.

¶21

12. In view of the above trial Court shall consider the issuance of necessary direction against the alleged prosecutrix/ victim to refund the amount of compensation, if any received by her, in the appropriate head of the treasury account and shall also ensure the compliance of provisions of section 344 Cr.P.C at the appropriate stage, if it deems fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶22

13-Office is directed to transmit a copy of this order to the court concerned within a week for compliance."

¶23

Although allegation of rape was levelled against the applicant, the same has not been supported by the victim before the Investigating Officer and the Magistrate.

¶24

The trial court is directed to take action as per the aforesaid direction issued by this Court, in present matter also.

¶25

Order Date :- 25.5.2023 Pradeep/-

¶26

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ajay Gautam Alias Ajay Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Ajay Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Ors.

Mangal Deep Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Others

Mailuddin @ Moinuddin Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

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

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