Allowed

Anuj Kumar Gautam v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC4 Dec 2023BAIL/50521/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this criminal miscellaneous bail application, the Allahabad High Court granted bail to the applicant, Anuj Kumar Gautam, who is accused of enticing a minor. The applicant argued the victim was of major age and that the incident occurred without the state's plausible explanation for FIR delay. The court accepted the bail application without adjudging innocence.

What did the court decide?

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

Anuj Kumar Gautam Vs State of U.P. and 3… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:229584

¶2

Court No. - 68

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50521 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Anuj Kumar Gautam Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Tripathi 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, learned counsel for the first informant and perused the record.

¶7

The prosecution version in brief is that on 27.03.2023 the minor daughter of the informant has been enticed away by the applicant and in connivance with his father and mother. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the incident is alleged to have taken place on 27.03.2023 whereas, the F.I.R. has been registered on 10.04.2023 without there being any plausible explanation of such an inordinate delay. He further submits that initially F.I.R. was registered under Section 363 and 120-B I.P.C. but during the course of investigation 366, 376 and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act has been added along with Section 363 I.P. whereas, Section 120-B I.P.C. has been dropped. Learned counsel further submits that according to her High School Examination-2021 marksheet the victim is major on the day of incident, since her date of birth has been recorded as 12.08.2006. He further submits that the victim in her statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. has specifically stated that her parents had scolded her, due to which, she left her parents house and went with the applicant out of her free will and has solemnised marriage with the applicant. It is thus contended that the victim is a consenting party, therefore no

¶8

offence is made out against the applicant, ergo the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. 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 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 04.08.2023 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. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶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 Anuj Kumar Gautam involved in Case Crime No. 61 of 2023 under Sections 363, 342, 376 I.P.C., and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Chaurakhas, District Kushi Nagar, 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

I. The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall

¶13

not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶14

II. The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

III. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

IV. The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶18

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶19

Order Date :- 4.12.2023-Mustaqeem/S.Ali.

¶20

Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Anuj Kumar Gautam v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anuj Kumar Gautam 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

Pintu @ Bhagat Ji Vs State of U.P.

Ram Sanehi Vs State of U.P.

Shoaib @ Aasif Vs State of U.P. and Another

Akash Pal Vs State of U.P.

Sapna Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Kumar @ Pawan Arya Vs State of U.P.