Allowed

Arun Kumar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC25 May 2023BAIL/17196/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application allowed for applicant in rape/POCSO case. Court considered victim's age and relationship details before granting bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to non-interference and appearance conditions.

What the court decided

Arun Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:116448

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17196 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Arun Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Suresh Dhar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Abida Syed,Gaurav Gupta

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Sri Suresh Dhar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Gaurav Gupta, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Amit Kumar Shukla, learned Brief Holder, for the State.

¶8

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.127 of 2023, under Sections 363,420, 376(3) and 506 IPC and Section 3/4(2) POCSO Act, Police Station Tilhar, District Shahjahanpur during pendency of the trial.

¶9

FIR of the present case was lodged against the applicant and two others and according to the FIR, applicant after preparing forged birth certificate and aadhar card of minor daughter of the informant aged about 15 years committed rape with her about one and half years before and thereafter he continuously harassed her and also took her indecent photographs and uploaded them on the Facebook and Whats app.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that entire allegation against the applicant is totally false and baseless and FIR of the present case was lodged after about more than one and half years from the date of alleged rape and apart from the rape other allegations of harassment etc. were also made against

¶11

the applicant in the FIR but all these allegations are vague and no reliance can be placed on such vague version.

¶12

He further submits that victim, i.e., the daughter of the informant is around 18 years old and as per Doctor, her radiological age is 17 years. However, according to the school record she is around 16 years and both applicant and victim loved each other and they performed marriage.

¶13

He further submits that although from the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. it appears that she made allegation of rape against the applicant but even from her both the statements it appears that she was consenting party.

¶14

He further submits that applicant did not commit rape with the victim and both applicant and victim loved each other and they have performed marriatge and applicant is not having any previous criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 22.2.2023.

¶15

Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that as per school record the age of the victim is around 16 years and even her radiological age is 17 years, therefore, she is below 18 years of age and she made specific allegation against the applicant in her both the statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. that by playing fraud applicant made physical relationship with her but both the learned counsels could not dispute that even in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. victim stated that she knew the applicant for the last two years and applicant also provided her mobile phone and there is no allegation in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. that applicant forcibly made physical relationship

¶16

with her.

¶17

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

¶18

Although as per school record victim appears to be 16 years old girl but her radiological age ascertained by the Doctor is 17 years and further FIR of the present case was lodged after about more than one and half years from the date of alleged commission of rape and although victim in her both the statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. stated that applicant made physical relationship with her but she in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. also stated that she knew the applicant for the last two years and applicant also provided her mobile phone.

¶19

Therefore, considering the age of the victim and allegation made by her against the applicant in her both the statements, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶20

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

¶21

Let the applicant- Arun Kumar 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:-

¶22

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

¶23

(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

¶24

evidence.

¶25

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and antisocial activity.

¶26

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.

¶27

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.

¶28

Order Date :- 25.5.2023

¶29

SKM

¶30

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Arun Kumar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Arun Kumar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kuldeep Singh Vs State of U.P.

Akash Goswami Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Yamuna Devi Vs State of U.P.

Ramdas @ Bhagat Vs State of U.P.

Dharmendra Kumar Sonkar Vs State of U.P.

Vivek Pal @ Shani Vs State of U.P.