Allowed

Shivam @ Golu v. State of U.P.and 3 Others

Allahabad HC26 Jun 2023BAIL/19047/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed the bail application of the applicant, Shivam @ Golu, in a POCSO and IPC case. The court relied on the ossification report confirming the victim was 18 and her statement alleging voluntary marriage, granting bail subject to bonds and standard conditions while stating nothing on merits.

What did the court decide?

released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount subject to standard conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:128517

¶2

Court No. - 79

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19047 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Shivam @ Golu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Singh Sengar,Ajay Singh Sengar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Jeetendra Kumar Sharma

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Ajay Singh Sengar, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Jeetendra Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Pramod Kumar Singh, learned AGA for the Staterespondent.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 1146 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Auraiya, District Auraiya, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶8

FIR of the present case was lodged against the applicant and his brother under sections 363, 366 IPC on 27.12.2022 and according to the FIR on 13.11.2022, applicant with the help of his brother, the co-accused Satyam enticed away the minor daughter of the informant aged about 16 years.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the entire allegations made against the applicant are totally false and baseless and applicant did not entice the daughter of the informant and daughter of the informant is a major girl aged about 18 years and this fact is even evident from ossification test report of the victim which shows that her age is about 18 years and even as per her high school certificate, she is more than 17 years.

¶10

He further submitted that actually prosecutrix i.e. victim of the case had gone alongwith the applicant according to her own wish and had performed marriage with the applicant and this fact is even evident from her statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. and applicant is having no previous criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 23.1.2023, therefore, he may be released on bail.

¶11

Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the

¶12

informant opposed the prayer for bail but they could not dispute the fact that as per radiological report, age of the victim is about 18 years and even as per educational certificate, she is more than 17 years of age and in her statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. she did not make any allegation against the applicant and stated that she had wilfully performed marriage with the applicant.

¶13

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

¶14

Considering the facts that as per ossification test report, victim is about 18 years and even as per her educational record, she is more than 17 years and in her statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C., she categorically stated that she had performed marriage with the applicant, therefore, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶15

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

¶16

Let the applicant- Shivam @ Golu , 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:-

¶17

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

¶18

(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.

¶19

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.

¶20

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.

¶21

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.

¶22

Order Date :- 26.6.2023/Ankita

¶23

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

Shivam @ Golu v. State of U.P.and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivam @ Golu 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunita Vs State of U.P.

Shyamu Vs State of U.P.

Vipin Singh Vs State of U.P.

Ramesh Alias Raju Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Leela Devi Vs State of U.P.

Murtuza Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others