Dismissed

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

Allahabad HC5 Jun 2023BAIL/17367/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of a bail application in a serious sexual assault case involving a minor. After hearing counsel and considering the FIR and investigation record, the court held the offence is a rape against a minor and rejected the bail prayer.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for enlargement on bail in case crime no. 617 of 2022 rejected.

Arun Kumar Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. and 3… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:124166

¶2

Court No. - 81

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 17367 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Arun Kumar Jaiswal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Nalin Kumar Srivastava,J.

¶6

Present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Arun Kumar Jaiswal with the prayer to enlarge him on bail in case crime no. 617 of 2022, under Sections 376, 506 IPC and 5/6 POCSO Act and 67 of I.T Act, P.S. Mohammadabad Gohna, District- Mau.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record. Despite sufficient service of notice none appears for the informant.

¶8

It is alleged in the F.I.R. that on 22.11.2022 the informant came to know that some obscene videos relating to her minor daughter was being viral on social media, when he inquired her daughter, she told that the present accused applicant had done some wrong with her in a furniture shop, when she was going to school and some obscene videos was also prepared, which was subsequently made viral to other accused persons Bholu Jaiswal, Akash Rai, Saurabh and Dhiraj. It is further alleged in the FIR that the victim told her father that all the named accused persons often tried to molest her, when she used to go to school. FIR was lodged on 25.11.2022 and investigation started.

¶9

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that there are several material contradictions in the statements of the victim under Section 161, 164 Cr.P.C. and in the FIR itself. It is further submitted that the medical report does not corroborate the prosecution version. It is further submitted that the story of the prosecution is false and concocted as the name of the co-accused Aman has been deliberately added in the statement of the victim and informant as well whereas in the FIR there is no mentioning of the name of co-

¶10

accused Aman. It is further submitted that no occification test has been performed to ascertain the age of the victim. It is further submitted that the I.O. did not collect any alleged obscene videos in respect to the present victim. He is languishing in jail since 16.12.2022 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶11

On the other hand, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that I.O. has collected the educational certificates of the victim and on the basis of that it has been found that the prosecutrix was minor on the date of incident. It is further submitted that the medical examination of the victim has been performed after a gap of long time from the occurrence and that is why the signs of rape have been disappeared. It is further submitted that the victim in her statement under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. has categorically stated that rape was committed with her in a furniture shop by the present accused applicant and he also made some obscene videos of the incident, which was subsequently made viral. It is further submitted that when she used to go to school the accused along with other co-accused persons often used to molest her. It is further submitted that it is a case of forceful sexual relation with the minor victim by a major accused. However, it is admitted that no such video has been collected by the I.O. during course of investigation as alleged in the FIR. Offence is very serious and the accused applicant is not entitled for any leniency by this Court and the bail application deserves to be rejected.

¶12

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, complicity of accused, scrutinizing the facts mentioned in the F.I.R., relying upon the statements of victim recorded under Section 161 before the I.O. and 164 CrPC before the Court and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that it is a case of rape against the minor victim, the applicant has not made out a case for bail. The bail application is liable to be rejected and the same is accordingly rejected .

¶13

Order Date :- 5.6.2023 Fhd

¶14

Digitally signed by :- FAHAD NIYAZ High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun Kumar Jaiswal 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

Gopal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Mithlesh Vs State of Up Thro Principal Secretary Home Gov of Up Lucknow

Ramavtar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Pratap Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ravindra Kumar @ Ravi Sagar Vs State of U.P.

Ajab Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another