Allowed

Rakesh Yadav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC7 Jul 2023BAIL/3583/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Sections 376(3), 323, 504 IPC and POCSO Act, the court allowed the applicant's release. The judgment notes the FIR was lodged five years after the alleged incident, the victim is now a major, and no indecent material was recovered during investigation.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Rakesh Yadav released on bail on personal bond and two sureties inequal amounts with specific conduct conditions.

Rakesh Yadav Vs State of U.P. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3583 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Rakesh Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd Haris Khan,Deepak Kumar Verma,Neeraj Mishra,Siya Ram Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashvni Mishra

¶4

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶5

Rejoinder affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Mohd Haris Khan, Advocate holding brief of Sri Sahib Alam and Deepak Kumar Verma Advocate holding brief of Sri S.R. Verma, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Ashvni Mishra, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Imran Khan, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.308 of 2022, under Sections 376(3), 323, 504 IPC, 67 of I.T. Act and 5(i)/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Mubarkpur, District Azamgarh, during pendency of the trial in the court below.

¶8

FIR of the present case was lodged against the applicant on 30.9.2022 and according to the FIR, informant was having friendship with the applicant since May, 2017 and applicant anyhow snapped her indecent photographs and thereafter started blackmailing her and also promised her to perform marriage with her and committed rape with her and in the year 2018, he forcefully caused her miscarriage and when informant pressurized her for marriage then he posted her indecent photographs and videos on social media.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the entire allegations made against the applicant are totally false and baseless and admittedly, FIR of the present case was lodged after about five years and there is no material on record which can show that applicant either ever prepared the indecent videos and photographs of the victim or posted the same on social media as during investigation, no such videos and photographs of the informant i.e. victim of the case could be recovered. He further submitted that according to the Doctor, radiological age of the victim is at present

¶10

more than 18 years.

¶11

He further submitted that actually applicant and victim was having love affair but thereafter some dispute arose between them and therefore, after five years, FIR of the present case was lodged by the informant. He next submitted that applicant never sexually exploited her and he is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 25.11.2022 i.e. for last seven months.

¶12

Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that at the time of alleged rape, victim was minor as according to her date of birth in Month of May, 2017, she was hardly 13-14 years and she was made allegation of sexual exploitation in the FIR as well as in her both the statements recorded under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. but both the counsels could not dispute the fact that FIR of the present was lodged quite belatedly after about five years of the alleged incident and during investigation, neither any indecent videos nor photographs of the victim could be recovered.

¶13

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

¶14

Although, from the record it reflects that at the time of alleged sexual exploitation, victim was minor but she started making allegation against the applicant after about five years as FIR of the present case was lodged after five years and at present admittedly victim is a major girl. Further, although there was allegation against the applicant that he prepared indecent videos and photographs of the victim and posted the same on social media but during investigation, no such videos and photographs of the victim could be recovered. Applicant is having no criminal history and he is in jail in the present matter since 25.11.2022.

¶15

Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, discussed above, 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- Rakesh Yadav, 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 :- 7.7.2023

¶24

Ankita

¶25

Digitally signed by :- ANKITA SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rakesh Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Yadav v. State of U.P.

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

Dharmendra Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vindu @ Dinesh Vs State of U.P.and 3 Others

Shubham Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shahjad Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Bhoop Devi@ Bhoop Dayee Vs State of U.P.

Satguroo Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others