Allowed

Bablu Bind v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC19 Jul 2023BAIL/26823/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by Bablu Bind, charged under the POCSO Act and IPC for offences including abducting and raping a minor. The court noted the victim's inconsistent narrations and granted bail without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Release of Bablu Bind on bail upon furnishing personal bond and two sureties with conditions regarding appearance and conduct.

Bablu Bind Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:144210

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26823 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Bablu Bind Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Brijesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

As matter pertains to the provisions of POCSO Act, therefore, on 16.6.2023 notice was issued to the informant, i.e., opposite party no.4.

¶7

As per office report dated 19.7.2023 notice has been served to the informant.

¶8

Sri Imran Khan, learned AGA, for the State, also apprised the Court that notice has been served to the informant of the case on 17.7.2023.

¶9

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

¶10

Heard Sri Brijesh Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Imran Khan, learned AGA, for the State.

¶11

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.28 of 2022, under Sections 366 and 376D IPC and Section 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Meja, District Prayagraj during pendency of the trial.

¶12

FIR of the present case was lodged against the applicant and two others and according to the FIR, co-accused Vibhashanker with the help of applicant and co-accused Rakesh enticed away the minor daughter of the informant aged about 17 years.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that although

¶14

applicant was named in the FIR but when the statement of victim was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. then she did not even disclose the name of applicant and stated that she had gone along with Vibha Shanker but when her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C.was recorded then she changed her earlier version and stated that applicant and co-accused Vibha Shanker and Rakesh committed rape with her and this fact clearly suggests that under the pressure of her parents in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she made allegation of rape against the applicant.

¶15

He further submits that applicant is not having any previous criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 2.2.2023, i.e., for the last about more than five months.

¶16

Per contra learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submits that victim is a minor girl aged about 13 years and she in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. made allegation of rape against the applicant, co-accused Vibha Shanker and Rakesh but could not dispute the fact that when her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded then she did not even disclose the name of applicant and stated that she according to her own wish she had gone with co-accused Vibha Shanker.

¶17

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

¶18

Although victim appears to be 13 years old girl and she in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. made allegation of rape against the applicant, co-accused Vibha Shanker and Rakesh but when her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded earlier then she did not even disclose the name of applicant and co-accused Rakesh and only stated that she had gone along with co-accused Vibha Shanker.

¶19

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the

¶20

case discussed above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶21

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

¶22

Let the applicant- Bablu Bind 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:-

¶23

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

¶24

(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.

¶25

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

¶26

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.

¶27

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.

¶28

Order Date :- 19.7.2023

¶29

SKM

¶30

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

Bablu Bind v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bablu Bind 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

Arun Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Chandrabhan Vs State of U.P.

Yusuf Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Santram Vs State of U.P.

Shiva @ Shivam Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others