In an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. involving charges under sections 354, 354-D, 506 IPC and POCSO Act 2012, the court, without expressing an opinion on the merits, granted bail to the applicant subject to furnishing a personal bond with two sureties.
Released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 80
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 11324 of 2022
Applicant :- Arun Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rajbir Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No. 1134 of 2019, under sections 354, 354-D, 506 I.P.C. and section 7/8 POCSO Act, 2012, Police Station Sector-49, District Gautambuddha Nagar.
Facts in brief are that the victim was coming back to her house from coaching centre, the applicant chased her and pressed to make conversation with him which she refused, on which the applicant mis-behaved with her. Again he chased and caught her hand. He also threatened her, as a result F.I.R. was lodged by the victim.
It is submitted that in this case, though the victim is said to be minor but nothing is on record to show that she was below 18. There was affair between the victim and the applicant that is the reason the applicant made conversation with her in the way to the coaching center but he did not catch her hand. There was exchange of letters between both of them, which shows that both of them were in affair and no any mis-behave was committed by the applicant against the victim but being annoyed with the conversation between the victim and the applicant this F.I.R. was lodged by the victim under pressure of her father. It is also submitted that she refused medical examination as a result there is no any proof on record to show that she was minor and molested by the applicant. It is also submitted that after investigation charge-sheet has been submitted against the applicant and in pursuance of process issued by the learned court there is apprehension of arrest against the applicant so requests for anticipatory bail during pendency of trial. It is also submitted that the father of the victim again lodged an F.I.R. against two other persons namely Deepak and Chhote Singh u/s 363 & 366 I.P.C., which shows that the present F.I.R. was also lodged against this applicant with ulterior motive.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail as aforesaid.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perusal of the record and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the case for anticipatory bail is made out, therefore, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail during pendency of trial.
Let the applicant- Arun shall be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
In case, applicant does not cooperates with trial, this order shall be deemed to be automatically vacated or cancelled.
Order Date :- 27.1.2023 Vibha Singh
Digitally signed by :- VIBHA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant during the pendency of the trial.
Whether the alleged victim's status as a minor affects the grounds for anticipatory bail.
Whether the apprehension of arrest justifies the grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Arun
State Of U.P.
Subhash Chandra Sharma
Vibha Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
