Allowed

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

Allahabad HC7 Jul 2023BAIL/12408/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by Satguroo in a criminal trial involving POCSO and IPC offences. The court released him on personal bond and two sureties, noting contradictions in the victim's testimony, without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount.

Satguroo Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:135116

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12408 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Satguroo Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Om Vikram Singh Chauhan,Praveen Kumar Tripathi,Shri Krishna Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Aditya Kumar Rai,Gyanendra Kumar Tripathi

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

None appeared on behalf of the informant.

¶7

Heard Sri Ram Om Vikram Singh Chauhan & Shri Praveen Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Shatrughan Yadav, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶8

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.167 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC & Sections 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Sahayal, District Auraiya, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶9

FIR of the present case was lodged on 07.10.2022, under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C. and according to the FIR, applicant and co-accused Sumit enticed away the minor daughter of the informant aged about 14 years.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that entire allegation made in the F.I.R. against applicant is totally false and baseless and this fact is evident from the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., in which she clearly stated that neither anybody enticed her nor ever committed rape with her and she according to her own sweet will had left her paternal home because in the morning on 06.10.2020 her parents scolded her. He further submitted that but subsequently when her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded then under the pressure of her parents, she stated that applicant has taken her and committed rape with her. He further submitted that this fact clearly suggests that victim is not a reliable witness and applicant has falsely been implicated in the present matter.

¶11

He further submitted that applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 09.112022, therefore, he may be released on bail.

¶12

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. made allegation of rape against the applicant but could not dispute the fact that in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she did not make any allegation against anyone including applicant.

¶13

I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶14

Although victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. made allegation of rape against the applicant but earlier when her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded, she stated that due to assault made by her parents, she left the house as per her own sweet will and neither anybody enticed her nor ever committed rape with her, therefore, considering the material contradictions in her both the statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. in may view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶15

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶16

Let the applicant- Satguroo , be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶17

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶18

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶19

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶21

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶22

Order Date :- 7.7.2023 Zafar

¶23

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satguroo 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

Dharmendra Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vindu @ Dinesh Vs State of U.P.and 3 Others

Shubham Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rakesh Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Shahjad Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Bhoop Devi@ Bhoop Dayee Vs State of U.P.