Allowed

Ankur v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC8 May 2023BAIL/10101/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed bail to the applicant falsely implicated in kidnapping and POCSO offences, balancing allegations of false implication against the nature of the grave offences and delay in trial.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions against tampering with evidence ensuring appearance and not indulging in unlawful activities.

Ankur Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:104094

¶2

Court No. - 86

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10101 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Ankur Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shahrukh,Mohd. Afzal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Mithilesh Kumar, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record.

¶7

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is next contended that a concocted and false story has been set up by the prosecution whereas the applicant has not committed any offence as alleged in the F.I.R. It is further submitted that applicant neither kidnapped the son of the victim nor he has done wrong with him. It is further submitted that there is material contradiction in the statement of victim and other witnesses. It is further submitted that ingredients of offences are absent and entire prosecution story is based on false and frivolous allegations. It is further submitted that trial is not likely to be concluded in near future. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 29.07.2022 and he has no criminal history.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submits that prima facie offence against the accused applicant is made out and in case applicant is release on bail, he will misuse the liberty of bail, but, he could not disputed the aforesaid facts.

¶9

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view

¶10

the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused, looking to the delay in conclusion of trial, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and the law laid down by the Apex Court in Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 , the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant Ankur involved in Case Crime No. 401 of 2022, under Sections 363, 377 I.P.C. and section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Pilkhuwa, District Hapur be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions.

¶12

(i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶13

(ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶14

(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.

¶15

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.

¶16

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶17

Order Date :- 8.5.2023

¶18

Bhanu

¶19

Digitally signed by :- BHANU PRATAP KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ankur v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ankur v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Ajay Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Nawab Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Vs State of U.P.

Sartaj Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vipul @ Mitthu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Farman Ali Alias Sameer Ali Vs State of U.P.