Allowed

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

Allahabad HC1 May 2023BAIL/56691/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application regarding POCSO and IPC charges involving enticement, the court considered the victim's age dispute and marital relationship. Finding the victim major and cohabiting with the applicant, the court held a fit case for bail was made out.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount with four specific conditions imposed.

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

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 56691 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Patil Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar,Amresh Bahadur Tiwari,Prakhar Srivastava,Shiv Saran Sharma,Somendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Nitesh Kumar Srivastava

¶4

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Shiv Saran Sharma and Mr. Somendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and Mr. Nitesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the first informant.

¶6

The instant bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 300 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376 of I.P.C. and Section 5J(2)/6 POCSO Act, Police Station-Gauri Bazar, District-Deoria, during the pendency of trial.

¶7

As per the prosecution case in brief, the informant who is father of the victim lodged F.I.R. on 16.10.2020 at about 21:12 hours, under Section 363 of I.P.C., against the present applicant with the allegations inter alia that on 30.05.2020 at about 3 am in the morning his daughter aged about 17 years was enticed away by the applicant.

¶8

The main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that as per the High School Certificate of the victim she was aged about 17 years and 2 months on the day of the incident whereas as per her ossification test report she is major aged about 20 years. Learned counsel for the applicant has also referred the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of the victim, wherein she has stated that the applicant was already known to her and she herself left her house and had gone to Bombay along with him where they solemnized their marriage and also got their marriage registered on 27.06.2020 in the OfÏce of Marriage Registration OfÏcer, DistrictGorakhpur. It is also pointed out that from the

¶9

wedlock of the applicant, victim gave birth to a female child and at present victim along with her child is living in the house of the applicant. Lastly, it is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no chance of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is languishing in jail since 22.08.2022 having no criminal history to his credit.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant but they could not dispute the above factual aspect of the matter as argued on behalf of the applicant.

¶11

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that as per ossification test report of the victim, she is major aged about 20 years as noted above. The victim in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has not made any allegation against the applicant and she along with her child is living in the house of the applicant.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed .

¶13

Let the applicant- Patil , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶14

(i) That the applicant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable.

¶15

(ii) That the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any

¶16

person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

(iii) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity.

¶18

(iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned before the release of the applicant on bail.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.

¶20

Order Date :- 1.5.2023 Kashifa

¶21

Digitally signed by :- KASHIFA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Patil 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

Arun Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Kafeel @ Kafeeluddin Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Indresh Pal Vs State of U.P.

Sangam Lal Bind Vs State of U.P.

Devendra Singh Alias Bittu Vs State of U.P.

Sahil @ Bhura Vs State of U.P. and Another