Dismissed

Akhilesh v. State of U.P and 3 Others

Allahabad HC19 Jan 2023BAIL/20559/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the Allahabad High Court rejected the plea of Akhilesh seeking release on bail. The accused faced charges under Sections 376DA, 342, 506 IPC and POCSO Act regarding rape of a minor. Despite innocence claims, the Court found no case made out for bail due to the nature and gravity of the offences.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected. Applicant remains in jail.

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

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20559 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Akhilesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kumar Dhama Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vijay Bahadur Shivhare

¶4

Hon'ble Mayank Kumar Jain,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant in Case Crime No. 04 of 2022, under Sections 376DA, 342, 506 I.P.C. and Section 6 POCSO Act, Police Station Kurara, District Hamirpur, with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. As per the allegation made in the FIR, the applicant and co-accused have committed rape with the minor daughter of the informant in the night of 31.12.2021. It is next submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case only due to the reason the victim was in love affair with the friend of co-accused Hari Shankar @ Puchchi and she went to the house of Puchchi on her own free will and in the morning she along with the cousin sister went to home of the co-accused Puchchi. The present applicant being friend of co-accused Hari Shankar @ Puchchi, has no concern with the alleged offence and when the victim was caught by her parent, the entire false story has been set up. It is next submitted that there are material contradictions in the statement of victim and the version of the FIR. The age of the victim is found 16 years and no internal or external injury was found on the person of victim.

¶8

It has been further submitted that applicant is languishing in jail since 05.01.2022 having no criminal history and that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶9

Per-contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application and argued that the facts narrated in the FIR are serious in nature. The applicant and co-accused were caught the daughter of first informant when she went outside the house for toilet and under the intoxication they committed rape on her. The victim is minor aged about 13 years at the time of incident and she has fully supported the prosecution version in her

¶10

statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., therefore the applicant is not entitled for bail.

¶11

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of allegations, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that no case for grant of bail is made out. Hence, the bail application is hereby rejected.

¶12

Order Date :- 19.1.2023 v.k.updh.

¶13

Digitally signed by :- VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Akhilesh v. State of U.P and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akhilesh 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

Rinku Singh Vs State of U.P.

Sufiyan Vs State of U.P.

Ashish Sen Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Anil Singh Vs State of U.P.

Akhilesh Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vijay Sahani Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others