Allowed

Deepakaran Sonkar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC7 Apr 2023BAIL/56830/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a bail application filed by Deepakaran Sonkar in a criminal case involving IPC Sections 363, 366, 376 AB, and the POCSO Act. The court granted bail after noting the victim's statement suggested inclination towards the applicant and lack of evidence regarding enticement.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail subject to personal bond, two sureties, and conditions regarding court appearance, evidence tampering, and criminal activity.

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

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 56830 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Deepakaran Sonkar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Satyendra Narayan Singh,Upendra Nath Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Despite service of notice upon opposite party no. 2/informant, no one has put in appearance on her behalf.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State.

¶7

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. 448 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376 AB of I.P.C. and 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Mau during the pendency of trial.

¶8

As per the prosecution case in brief, the informant, who is mother of the victim lodged F.I.R. on 24.09.2022, at 12:28 hours, with regard to an incident, which took place on 18.09.2022, under Sections 363, 366 of I.P.C., against the applicant, alleging inter-alia that applicant used to visit her house and on 18.09.2022, her daughter was enticed away by the applicant.

¶9

It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that after 4-5 days, the victim herself returned to her house, thereafter, her statements under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. were recorded, in which she has not supported the prosecution case and stated inter-alia that she was in touch with the applicant as she loves him. On 19.09.2022, the applicant had come to take medicine at Mau, at that time, she was going to the house of her friend, she met him and insisted to take her with him but the applicant refused, then she threatened that she will commit suicide, thereafter, applicant took her to Ghazipur and from Ghazipur they went to Varanasi, where they solemnized marriage in a temple and also spent their night at the Railway

¶10

Station, Varanasi. On the next day, they went to Kolkata, where they stayed for four days as husband and wife, physical relation was also made between them, lastly, she expressed her desire to live with the applicant. On the strength of aforesaid submission, it is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant was not at fault, but under compulsion, he took the victim with him as she threatened to commit suicide. Lastly, it is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant who is languishing in jail since 28.09.2022 is entitled to be released on bail.

¶11

Per contra , learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the victim is minor but could not dispute the above factual aspect of the matter as argued on behalf of the applicant.

¶12

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that though the victim is minor, but considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case only conclusion can be drawn that victim was very much inclined towards the applicant and was bent upon to live with him. The statement of the victim and the photographs, which have been brought on record, do not reveal that she was enticed away by the applicant, therefore, 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, who is a young boy of 20 years has made out a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed .

¶13

Let the applicant- Deepakaran Sonkar , 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

¶15

attend the court unless inevitable.

¶16

(ii) That the applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any 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 :- 7.4.2023 Kashifa

¶21

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

Deepakaran Sonkar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepakaran Sonkar 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

Jitendra @ Jeetu Vs State of U.P.

Pardeshi Kumar Bind Vs State of U.P.

Rajesh Sonkar Vs State of U.P.

Vishal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ravi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vipin Nishad Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others