Allowed

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

Allahabad HC23 May 2023BAIL/19284/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Sections 363, 376-D, 323, 506 IPC and POCSO Act, this court allowed the applicant's bail on a personal bond and two sureties, noting the co-accused was already on bail and the applicant lacked prior criminal history, without expressing an opinion on case merits.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties in the like amount subject to conditions.

Munna Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:114409

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19284 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Munna Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Mukesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Sri Suresh Bahadur Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the Staterespondent apprise the Court that on 02.05.203, the notice has been served to the informant.

¶7

Despite service of notice none appeared on behalf of the informant.

¶8

Heard Sri Mukesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Suresh Bahadur Singh, learned A.G.A.-I for the State-respondent.

¶9

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.440 of 2022, under Sections 363, 376-D, 323, 506 I.P.C. & Sections 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Kotwali Padrauna, District Kushinagar, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶10

FIR of the present case was lodged against unknown persons, under Section 363 I.P.C. and according to the FIR, on 24.08.2022 in the early morning at about 4:00 a.m., when sister of the informant was doing jogging, unknown persons came from the bolero vehicle and kidnapped her and when informant chased them, they after dropping his sister ran away.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant was not named in the FIR and even when the statement of the victim was recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., she did not disclose the name of any accused persons including applicant although she stated that in the running four wheeler vehicle, she was raped by one unknown accused person. He further submitted that during investigation, co-accused Vikki was arrested on the basis of the information furnished by police informer and he disclosed the name of the applicant and at the time of his arrest victim was also arrived there and she identified him and stated to the Investigating Officer that he is the person, who committed rape with her although she further stated that other accused persons were also doing indecent activities with her, but there is no allegation of rape against applicant.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that coaccused Vikki has been enlarged on bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 20.01.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.55339 of 2023, which has been annexed as Annexure No.8 to the affidavit filed in support of the present bail application and the case of the applicant is even better footing than him. He next submitted that applicant is not having any previous criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 09.09.2022, therefore, he may be released on bail.

¶13

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the arguments on facts as advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶14

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

¶15

Considering the fact that the name of applicant was disclosed in the present matter through the statement of co-accused Vikki and victim of the case identified Vikki as a person, who committed rape with her and Vikki has already been enlarged on bail, therefore, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶16

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

¶17

Let the applicant- Munna , 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:-

¶18

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

¶19

(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.

¶20

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

¶21

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.

¶22

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.

¶23

Order Date :- 23.5.2023 Zafar

¶24

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Munna 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

Shanker Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shah Alam @ Gamgam Vs State of U.P.

Pradeep Jain Vs State of U.P.

Sameer Vs State of U.P.

Sandeep Kumar Nishad Vs State of U.P.

Lokesh Kumar Alias Lokendra Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others