Prince Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:136058

Court No. - 70

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18536 of 2023

Applicant :- Prince Chauhan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sachchida Nand Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manjur Mohammad Ansari

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Sachchida Nand Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, sri Manjur Mohammad Ansari, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Tanay Kumar, learned AGA, for the State.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.39 of 2023, under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Tamkuhiraj, District Kushinagar during pendency of the trial.

¶8

FIR of the present case was lodged against the applicant and two others and according to the FIR, applicant with the help of two other co-accused persons enticed away the minor daughter of the informant aged about 15 years.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that entire allegation made against the applicant is totally false and baseless and actually daughter of the informant of the case is major aged about more than 18 years and she according to her own wish had gone with applicant and also performed marriage with him and this fact is even evident from her both the statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C.

¶10

He further submits that although as per the educational record the age of victim at the time of incident was around 16 and 1/2 years old but during investigation her ossification test was not conducted and victim in her statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. stated that she is about 18 years, therefore, it appears that she is major and her parents disclosed her wrong date of birth in her educational record.

¶11

He further submits that from the perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. it appears that she made serious allegation of assault against her mother, i.e., informant of the case and her brother and did not make any allegation against the applicant. He fuhrer submits that applicant is not having any previous criminal history and is in jail since 1.3.2023

¶12

Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that victim as per her educational certificate at the time of incident was around 16 and 1/2 years old and her consent is immaterial but both the learned counsels could not dispute the fact that victim in her both the statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. did not make any allegation against the applicant and made allegation against the informant, i.e., her mother and her brother and during investigation her ossification test was not conducted.

¶13

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

¶14

Although as per the educational certificate of the victim of Class-VI it appears that on the date of incident she was around 16 and 1/2 years old but in her both the statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. she did not make

¶15

any allegation against the applicant and she categorically stated that she had gone along with applicant according to her own wish and has performed marriage with him and she in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. made serious allegation of assault against her mother, i.e., the informant and her brother.

¶16

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶17

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

¶18

Let the applicant- Prince Chauhan 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:-

¶19

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

¶20

(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.

¶21

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

¶22

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.

¶23

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited

¶24

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.

¶25

Order Date :- 10.7.2023 SKM

¶26

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

Prince Chauhan v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prince Chauhan v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

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.

Ajay Vs State of U.P.

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

Smt. Kahkasha Alias Zebi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others