Allowed

Anuj Kumar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC28 Aug 2023BAIL/32486/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to Anuj Kumar, the brother-in-law of the main accused, in a criminal case under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act. The court relied on the victim's statement denying the applicant's involvement and approved four specific conditions for bail.

What did the court decide?

Release of Anuj Kumar on bail with a personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions regarding non-misuse and attendance.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:173032

¶2

Court No. - 77

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32486 of 2023 Applicant :- Anuj Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Faisal Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Renu Agarwal,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State-respondent and perused the material brought on record on the instant application for bail.

¶6

The present application for bail has been filed seeking bail in Case Crime No.70 of 2023, under Sections 365, 368, IPC and section 16/17 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Purkaji, District Muzaffar Nagar.

¶7

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is submitted that victim is major girl and she voluntarily eloped with the main accused Sonu. The applicant is brother-in-law of main accused Sonu. The victim voluntarily went to Amritsar on 17.03.2023 and remained in Gurdwara till 14.07.2023. She contacted to co-accused Sonu on 15.07.2023, thereafter, she solemnized marriage with Sonu on 15.07.2023 in a temple at Jaipur. The arrest of main accused Sonu has already stayed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.08.2023, passed in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No.12238 of 2023. The victim in her statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. specifically sated that there is no role of Anuj Kumar and Monu in the incident and she voluntarily eloped with Sonu. The applicant is languishing in jail since 29.05.2023 having no criminal history and in case he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶8

On the other hand, learned AGA for the State submitted that victim was minor at the time of incident and opposed the prayer of bail.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account that applicant is brother-in-law of main accused Sonu, the victim has not assigned any specific role to the present applicant in her statement recorded

¶10

under section 164 Cr.P.C. she specifically state that Anuj Kumar and Monu were not involved in the case, applicant is languishing in jail since 29.05.2023 and undertakes that in case he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty and would cooperate in the trial proceedings, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to enlarge the accusedapplicant on bail.

¶11

Let applicant- Anuj Kumar be released on bail in the above case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶12

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶13

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶16

(v) The applicant shall also furnish an undertaking from the sureties that the properties (movable/immovable) which are the basis of accepting the surety, shall not be disposed of by them till the conclusion of trial.

¶17

(vi) The applicant shall also give an undertaking to the effect that he will not change his address without prior intimation to the trial court concerned.

¶18

It is made clear that during the course of investigation the applicant shall cooperate with the investigation.

¶19

(Renu Agarwal,J.)

¶20

Order Date :- 28.8.2023/VKG

¶21

Digitally signed by :- VIJAY KUMAR GUPTA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anuj Kumar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anuj Kumar 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Iiu@ Afzal Vs State of U.P.

Shambhu Nath Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Kumari Sangeeta Vs State of U.P.

Mukesh Singh Vs State of U.P.

Joheb Pathan Vs State of U.P.

Neeraj Kumar Vs State of U.P.