Dismissed

Lal Sahab @ Sadhu Banwasi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC19 Apr 2023BAIL/12023/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application, the court examined allegations of rape of a minor and creation of indecent videos. The bail was rejected on balance of probabilities based on the gravity of offences and recovery of evidence, noting gaps in FIR were due to low socio-economic status of parties.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected; applicant not entitled to release on bail.

Lal Sahab @ Sadhu Banwasi Vs State of U.P… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12023 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Lal Sahab @ Sadhu Banwasi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶5

Sri Amit Kumar Shukla, learned Brief Holder for the State apprise the court that on 22.3.2023 notice has been served to the informant of the case. Despite service of notice none appeared on behalf of the informant.

¶6

Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Jhamman Ram, learned AGA for the Staterespondent.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 291 of 2022, under Sections 455, 376 IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police StationLohta, District- Varanasi, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶8

According to the F.I.R. applicant committed rape with the minor daughter of the informant aged about 14 years and thereafter he prepared the video and viraled the same.

¶9

Learned counsel for applicant submits that entire allegation made against applicant is totally false and frivolous and applicant neither committed rape with the daughter of the informant nor he ever prepared her indecent videograph and, therefore, there was no question for applicant to viral the same.

¶10

He further submits that applicant has been implicated in the present matter due to village partybandi and during investigation investigating officer could not collect any evidence which can show that applicant is the person who viraled indecent videographs of the victim.

¶11

He further submits neither in the F.I.R. nor in the statement of any witnesses including the victim any date of alleged incident was mentioned and this fact clearly suggests that entire allegation

¶12

is false and baseless.

¶13

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that applicant committed rape with the minor daughter of the informant who is hardly 15 years of age and even as per the C.M.O. certificate the age of the victim was between 14-15 years and, therefore, she was minor and he not only committed rape with her but also prepared her indecent videograph and thereafter viraled the same and during investigation, investigating officer also made recovery of viraled indecent videograph of the victim, therefore, applicant should not be released on bail.

¶14

I have heard both the parties and perused the record.

¶15

There is allegation against applicant that applicant committed rape with the minor daughter of the informant aged about 14 years and even as per the report of the C.M.O. the age of the victim was between 14-15 years. Further there is also allegation against applicant that applicant after committing rape prepared indecent videograph of the victim and thereafter viraled the same and during investigation the viraled indecent photographs were also recovered by the investigating officer. Although in the F.I.R. and in the statement of the witnesses including the statement of victim it appears that date of alleged commission of rape has not been mentioned but even during the course of argument learned counsel for applicant submitted that informant and applicant were not having any high status in the society and their living standard is not high and they belong to the strata of lower income group, therefore, it cannot be expected from such type of people to narrate each and every details either in the F.I.R. or in their statement recorded during investigation and this fact can only be appreciated at the time of trial.

¶16

Therefore, from the discussions made above, in my view, applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶17

Accordingly, the instant bail application is rejected at this stage.

¶18

Order Date :- 19.4.2023 Kumar Manish.

¶19

Digitally signed by :- MANISH TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Lal Sahab @ Sadhu Banwasi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lal Sahab @ Sadhu Banwasi 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vipin Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ravi Vishwakarma Vs State of Uttar Pradesh through Secetary Home and 3 Others

Kallan and Another Vs State of U.P.

Kamlesh Vs State of U.P.

Ansar Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Guddu Vs State of U.P.