Allowed

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

Allahabad HC6 Nov 2023BAIL/47181/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Sections 376, 328, 506 IPC, 67-B IT Act, and 3/4 POCSO Act, the court allowed the bail petition. The applicant argued innocence and false implication due to FIR delay and victim statement contradictions. The court favoured bail without adjudging merits.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail subject to furnishing a personal bond and two heavy local sureties, and compliance with specific conditions regarding evidence and witness interaction.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:213050

¶2

Court No. - 68

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47181 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Suraj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Jayendra Kumar Mishra,Keerti Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶7

It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submits that the incident has occurred on 3.6.2023 while FIR has been lodged on 20.8.2023 without disclosing any plausible reason of delay which creates doubt. He further submits that as per FIR, prosecutrix is a major girl, aged about 18 years. He further submits that there is major contradiction in the statements of the victim recorded u/s 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. It is thus conceded that no offence is made out against the applicant. He next submits that victim is a major girl and at the time of incident she was studying in class 10 and as per her marksheet issued by the Principal her date of birth is 2.7.2005. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is

¶8

also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 21.8.2023, having no criminal history.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence.

¶10

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of evidence, and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Hence the bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let applicant Suraj involved in Case Crime No.140 of 2023, under Sections 376, 328, 506 I.P.C. 67 B, I.T. Act and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Chatta, District Agra, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶12

A. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶13

B. The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶14

C. The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. D. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is an accused, or suspected, of the commission of he is suspected.

¶15

E. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any

¶16

inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. 6. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant in accordance with law.

¶17

Order Date :- 6.11.2023 m.a.

¶18

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AYYUB High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj 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

Mahendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Kesher Devi Vs State of U.P.

Hajari Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Monu Rajbhar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Indrapal @ Mantri Vs State of U.P.

Sandeep Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others