Mohd Fariyad v. State of U.P. and 3 Others
Case brief
What is this about?
This court rejected a bail application for an accused alleged to have committed sexual assault on an 11-year-old child under the POCSO Act. The court found no good or sufficient ground for bail due to the gravity of the offence and the non-consenting nature of the minor victim.
What did the court decide?
The bail application was rejected; applicant denied bail.
What the court decided
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:233042
Court No. - 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40050 of 2023
Applicant :- Mohd Fariyad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Sahu,Praveen Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Arvind Kumar Sahu, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State.
Perused the record.
This application for bail has been filed by applicant- Mohd Fariyad, seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 108 of 2023, under sections 363, 376(2) N, 376(A,B) IPC and 5- M/6 POCSO Act, Police Station- Bithari Chainpuri, District Bareilly, during the pendency of trial.
At the very outset, the learned A.G.A. submits that notice of present application for bail has been served upon opposite party-4 on 8.9.2023. However, inspite of service of notice, no one has put in appearance on behalf of first informant-opposite party-4 to oppose this application for bail.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail.
Whether the prosecutrix is a consenting party given the nature of the allegations.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Mohd Fariyad
- respondent
State Of U.P.
Coram
Rajeev Misra
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · December
- Registered
- Case no.
- BAIL/40050/2023
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court