Allowed

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

Allahabad HC6 Jul 2023BAIL/18940/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a bail application for Vindu @ Dinesh in a child rape and abduction case. The court granted bail noting the victim's statements indicated voluntary association, while clarifying that the order does not decide the case on merits.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties on specified conditions.

Vindu @ Dinesh Vs State of U.P.and 3 Others — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:133126

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18940 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Vindu @ Dinesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Singh Sengar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Chandra Prakash Tiwari

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Sanjay Singh Sengar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Chandra Prakash Tiwari, learned counsel for the informant and Dr.S.B.Maurya, learned AGA-I, 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.527 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Mahoba, District Mahoba during pendency of the trial.

¶8

FIR of the present case was lodged against the applicant under Sections 363 and 366 IPC and according to the FIR, applicant enticed away the minor daughter of the informant aged about 14 years.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant contended that although from the educational record and as per CMO report the victim was around 15 years old at the time of incident but she in her both the statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. did not make any allegation against the applicant and categorically stated that she according to her own wish had gone along with the applicant and also performed marriage with him and she also stated that she even wants to live with him. He further submits that now the victim has already examined by the trial court as PW-1 and before the trial court she in her cross-examination categorically stated that she still wants to live with applicant and she had gone along with him according

¶10

to her own wish and, therefore, considering the statements of victim applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶11

He further submits that applicant in the present matter is in jail since 23.11.2022, i..e, for the last about more than 7 months.

¶12

Per contra, learned AGA and learned informant counsel opposed the prayer for bail and submits that the age of the victim according to the educational record and as per the CMO report was around 15 years at the time of incident, therefore, she was well below 18 years of age and therefore, her consent is immaterial. They further submits that considering the age of victim, applicant should not be released on bail.

¶13

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

¶14

Although victim appears to be minor according to her educational certificate and even as per the CMO report and from both the documents it appears that she was around 15 years at the time of incident but victim in her both the statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. categorically stated that she had gone along with applicant according to her own wish and also performed marriage with him and in the statement before the trial court she repeated her statement recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. and in her both the statements recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and before trial court she categorically stated that she still wants to live the applicant.

¶15

The law is settled that the bail should not be rejected for punitive purposes.

¶16

As victim did not make any allegation that applicant either enticed her away or forcibly committed rape with her rather she her in both the statements recorded under Sections

¶17

161 and 164 Cr.P.C.even before the trial court favoured the applicant, therefore, considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that applicant is in jail since 23.11.2022, i.e., for the last about more than 7 months, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶18

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

¶19

Let the applicant- Vindu @ Dinesh 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:-

¶20

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

¶21

(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.

¶22

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

¶23

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.

¶24

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.

¶25

Order Date :- 6.7.2023/SKM

¶26

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vindu @ Dinesh 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

Ramgiri @ Ram Das Vs State of U.P.

Gufran Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vishal Sahni @ Vikki Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dharmendra Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Arvind @ Anil Vs State of U.P.