Dismissed¶16

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

Allahabad HC17 May 2023BAIL/18357/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court bail rejection; Ankit v. State of U.P. and 3 Others; CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 18357 of 2023; Case Crime No. 204 of 2019; Sections 376, 354-A IPC; Sections 3/4 POCSO Act; rape of minor girl aged about 13 years; victim's Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. statements; false implication plea rejected; bail denied; Sameer Jain, J.; order dated 17.5.2023; neutral citation 2023:AHC:108171.

What did the court decide?

There are serious allegations against the applicant that he, along with other co-accused persons, dragged the victim, a girl of about 13 years, into a room and committed rape with her; the victim, in both her statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., stated that the applicant committed rape with her. ¶14

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:108171

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18357 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Ankit Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Prem Prakash Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Sri Varun Kumar Agnihotri, learned AGA apprised the Court that on 18.4.2023 notice has been sent to the informant. Despite service of notice, none appeared on behalf of the informant.

¶7

Heard Ms. Ranjana Singh Advocate holding brief of Sri Prem Prakash Yadav and Sri Varun Kumar Agnihotri, learned Brief Holder for the State-respondent.

¶8

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 204 of 2019, under Sections 376, 354-A IPC and section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Jewar, District Gautam Budh Nagar, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶9

FIR of the present case was lodged against the applicant and three others and according to the FIR applicant and other coaccused persons dragged the minor daughter of the informant aged about 13 years in the room and thereafter applicant committed rape with her.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the entire allegations made against the applicant are totally false and baseless and applicant did not commit rape with the victim although victim is hardly 13 years old but injury report of the victim completely belies the prosecution case of rape as doctor did not find any injury on her person. He further submitted that FIR of the present case was lodged belatedly after about 24 hours, therefore, applicant may be released on bail.

¶11

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there are serious allegation of rape against the applicant and the victim is 13 years old minor girl, therefore, applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶12

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the

¶13

record of the case.

¶14

There are serious allegation against the applicant that he alongwith other co-accused persons firstly dragged the victim who is hardly 13 years in the room and thereafter committed rape with her and victim in her both the statements recorded under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. stated that applicant committed rape with her. Learned counsel failed to show any good reason for false implication.

¶15

Therefore, considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, in my view, applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶16

Accordingly, the instant bail application stands rejected .

¶17

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.

¶18

Order Date :- 17.5.2023

¶19

Ankita

¶20

Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Madhusudan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Arjun Nishad Vs State of U.P.

Ashish Kumar Kushwaha @ Pintu Vs State of U.P.

Brijesh Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Awadhesh Kumar Rathore Vs State of U.P.