Allowed

Balram @ Kalla v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Jan 2023ABAIL/10309/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court considered an anticipatory bail application under CrPC 438 in a case involving alleged enticement of a minor girl under IPC 363 and 366. The applicant, married to the victim, claimed innocence and cooperation. The court held bail was made out and granted conditions including a personal bond, appearance for interrogation, and prohibition on tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties, subject to conditions including cooperation with police, non-leave of India, and no tampering with evidence.

Balram @ Kalla Vs State of U.P. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 77

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10309 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Balram @ Kalla Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Sharma,Prashant Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Prashant Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Pankaj Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 150 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366 IPC, P.S. Mursan, District-Hathras , with the prayer that in the event of arrest, applicant may be released on bail.

¶7

The FIR has been lodged by the father of the victim with the allegations that on 23.08.2022 at about 11:00 p.m., the informant's 15 years old daughter was enticed away by the applicant with the help and assistance of other co-accused persons.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has an apprehension that he may be arrested in the above-mentioned case, whereas there is no credible evidence against him. He further submits that the applicant has not forcefully enticed away the victim, namely, Neelam. They were friendly with each other and have performed marriage. The Marriage Certificate has been annexed at Page 20 of the bail application to certify the same. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn the attention of the Court at para 12 wherein it has been mentioned that the victim is major and right now, has solemnized marriage with the applicant and is living with him as his wife. The applicant undertakes to co-operate during investigation and trial and he would appear as and when required by the investigating agency or Court. It has been stated that in case, the applicant is granted anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and will co-operate during investigation and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant. He has submitted that in view of the seriousness of the allegations made against the applicant, he is not entitled to grant of anticipatory bail. The apprehension of the applicant is not founded on any material on record. Only on the basis of imaginary fear, anticipatory bail cannot be granted.

¶10

It may be stated that in case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre vs. State of Maharashtra, (2011) 1 SCC 694 , it has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court that while deciding anticipatory bail, Court must consider nature and gravity of accusation, antecedent of accused, possibility of accused to flee from justice and that Court must evaluate entire available material against the accused carefully and that the exact role of the accused has also to be taken into consideration.

¶11

In the instant case, considering the settled principles of law regarding anticipatory bail, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, nature of accusation, role of applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, a case for anticipatory bail is made out.

¶12

The anticipatory bail application is disposed off .

¶13

In the event of arrest of the applicant- Balram @ Kalla in the aforesaid case crime, he shall be released on anticipatory bail till the submission of police report, if any, under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. before the competent Court on his furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned/Court below concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

(i) that the applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected;

¶15

(ii) the applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by the police as and when required;

¶16

(iii) that 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;

¶17

(iv) that the applicant shall not leave India without the previous

¶18

permission of the Court;

¶19

In default of any of the conditions, the Investigating Officer/prosecution shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.

¶20

The Investigating Officer is directed to conclude the investigation, if pending, of the present case in accordance with law, expeditiously, independently without being prejudiced by any observations made by this Court while considering and deciding the present anticipatory bail application of the applicant.

¶21

Order Date :- 2.1.2023 Jitendra/-

¶22

Digitally signed by :- JITENDRA KUMAR YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Balram @ Kalla v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balram @ Kalla v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rahul Vs State of U.P.

Asif Alias Munna Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Deepak Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Nirmala Goyal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kanchid Singh Vs State of U.P.

Kakul Vs State of U.P and 2 Others