Arvind Yadav Alias Lalau Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Court No. - 16

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 895 of 2023

Applicant :- Arvind Yadav Alias Lalau Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 3 Others

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Mukesh Kumar,Gulam Mustafa Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ramesh Kumar Srivastava

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

The learned A.G.A. for the State as well as the learned counsel for the informant have filed counter affidavit which are taken on record.

¶7

Heard Sri Gulam Mustafa, leaned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sriniwas Bajpai, the learned A.G.A for the State and Sri Ramesh Kumar Srivastava, the learned counsel for the informant and perused the record.

¶8

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 195 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376, 323, 506 I.P.C. and Section 5/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, registered at Police Station Khiro, District Raebareli.

¶9

The aforesaid application has been registered on the basis of First Information Report lodged on 17.04.2022 against the applicant and one Bhupendra Yadav alias Bacchan Lal alleging that in the night of 13.04.2022, the accused persons enticed away the informant's daughter aged about 15 years.

¶10

The victim was recovered on 26.04.2022 and in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she stated that she was aged about 18 years and she had gone with the applicant out of her own free will; that she stayed at Mumbai for three days and she had married the applicant in a temple. She further stated that she is in love with the applicant for the past two years and she wants to live with him.

¶11

In the medico-legal examination report of the alleged victim, no abnormality has been detected.

¶12

In the Statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the alleged victim stated that Bachhan Lal and 'Lalau alias Upendra' had forcibly taken her away from her home and they committed a misdeed with her. She repetitively mentioned the aforesaid

¶13

names and in response to a categorical question put to her towards the end of her statement, asking her to tell the names of the persons who had committed the misdeed with her, the applicant again mentioned the names of 'Lalau alias Upendra' and Bacchan Lal.

¶14

Although, the alleged victim did not mention the applicant's name i.e. 'Arvind Yadav alias Lalau' in her statement recorded before the Magistrate, after recording of the aforesaid statements the Investigating Officer has recorded an additional statements of the alleged victim on 15.05.2022 wherein, she stated that Bacchna Lal alias Bhupendra had played no role in the incident and it was the applicant 'Arvind Yadav alias Lalau, who had enticed her away and had committed a misdeed with her.

¶15

After the victim had been produced before the Magistrate and the Magistrate had recorded her statement, the Investigating Officer had no authority to record any additional statement of the victim and the subsequent statement recorded by the investigating officer, which runs contrary to the statement recorded before the Magistrate, would be of no avail.

¶16

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case that in the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the victim categorically stated that the applicant has not committed any misdeed with her and in her statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C., she did not name the applicant and also keeping in view the fact that the applicant has no criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 30.04.2022, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail in the aforesaid case.

¶17

Accordingly, this bail application stands allowed .

¶18

Let the applicant Arvind Yadav Alias Lalau be released on bail inCase Crime No. 195 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376, 323, 506 I.P.C. and Section 5/6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, registered at Police Station Khiro, 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:-

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

Order Date :- 15.3.2023 Preeti.

¶24

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

Arvind Yadav Alias Lalau v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arvind Yadav Alias Lalau v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of 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

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Virendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Civil Lko.

Ajay Singh Bhadauriya @ Lala Vs State of U.P. Thru Home Deptt. Lucknow and Ors.

Pratyush Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Chetram Lodh @ Jijau Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Secrt. Lko. and 3 Others

Raja Ram and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P.

Asharam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko.