Allowed

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

Allahabad HC24 Aug 2023BAIL/35512/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a bail application filed by Rohit under IPC and POCSO sections. Relying on statements and ossification reports indicating the prosecutrix was a major adult who consented and married the applicant, the judge granted release subject to bond conditions without expressing an opinion on the case merits.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to specified conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:170878

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35512 of 2023

¶4

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

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Sri Rajeev Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA, for the State, apprised the Court that on 4.8.2023 notice has been served to the informant of the case.

¶7

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

¶8

Heard Sri Dhiraj Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Rajeev Dhar Dwivedi, learned AGA, for the State.

¶9

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.7 of 2023, under Sections 363,366 and 376 IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Janakpuri, District Saharanpur during pendency of the trial.

¶10

FIR of the present case was lodged on 12.1.2023 against the applicant under Section 363 IPC and according to the FIR, on 1.1.2023 applicant enticed away the minor daughter of the informant aged about 17 years.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that entire allegation against the applicant is totally false and baseless and applicant is innocent and actually prosecutrix is a major girl aged about 18

¶12

years and she according to her own wish had gone along with applicant and also performed marriage with him and these facts are evident from her both the statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C.

¶13

He further submits that even as per school record and ossification test report of the prosecutrix, she was around 18 years of age and, therefore, at the time of incident she was major.

¶14

He further submits that applicant is not having any previous criminal history and in the present matter he is in jail since 18.2.2023.

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

Considering the fact that from the school record as well as from the certificate issued by CMO concerned, prosecutrix at the time of incident was around 18 years of age and she in her both the statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. stated that she had gone along with applicant and also performed marriage with him, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶18

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

¶19

Let the applicant- Rohit be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the

¶20

like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶21

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

¶22

(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.

¶23

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

¶24

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.

¶25

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.

¶26

Order Date :- 24.8.2023 SKM

¶27

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit 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

Yadvendra Alias Mona Vs State of U.P.

Gunakar Urf Shri Krishna Vs State of U.P.

Satyendra Kumar Chaubey @ Sabloo Vs State of U.P.

Kamlesh Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Archana Jain Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Faujdar Vs State of U.P.and Another