Arvind v. State of U.P. and 3 Others
Case brief
What is this about?
The High Court rejected a bail application filed by Arvind accused of offences under IPC 376AB and POCSO against an 11-year-old child. Despite the applicant's clean antecedents and the charge-sheet filed, the Court found no sufficient ground to grant bail due to the gravity of the offence ('stranger' offender against a minor) and lack of dependable explanation for discrepancies in medical and pros
What did the court decide?
The bail application is rejected. The accused is to remain in custody pending trial.
What the court decided
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:210264
Court No. - 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37398 of 2023
Applicant :- Arvind Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Brijesh Kumar Gautam,Shiv Vilas Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
- Heard Mr. Shiv Vilas Mishra, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State.
- Perused the record.
- Instant bail application has been filed by applicant-Arvind seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 166 of 2023 under Sections 376AB I.P.C. and 5m/6 POCSO Act, Police Station- Babugarh, District- Hapur, during the pendency of trial.
- Instant application for bail came up for orders on 09.10..2023 and this Court passed the following order:
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether learned counsel for applicant could overcome objections regarding age of prosecutrix, departure in statements, and nature of offence to secure bail.
Whether continuance of OS covers suspension or inactivation of person accessing unauthorized electronic devices or content.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Arvind
- respondent
State Of U.P.
Coram
Rajeev Misra
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · November
- Registered
- Case no.
- BAIL/37398/2023
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court