Allowed

Sanny Tomar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC12 May 2023BAIL/57583/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under CrPC in a POCSO offence case, the court allowed the applicant's bail noting that the victim's initial CWC statement indicated a consensual relationship and the victim was likely a major, while noting statements of rape were recorded later under police investigation.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in the like amount with specific conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:102912

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 57583 of 2022

¶4

Applicant :- Sanny Tomar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Rana,Anuj Chaudhary,Rajesh Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ankit Kumar Yadav,Maan Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Amit Rana, learned counsel for the applicant, Maan Singh, learned counsel for the informant and Sri Tanay Kumar, learned AGA, for the State.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.471 of 2022, under Sections 363 and 366 IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Nai Mandi, District Muzaffar Nagar during pendency of the trial.

¶8

FIR of the present case was lodged against unknown persons under Section 363 IPC and according to the FIR on 2.9.2022 the niece of the informant aged about 17 years had gone somewhere from the house.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant was not named in the FIR and when victim was recovered after about 13 days then she was produced before the Child Welfare Committee, Hapur and her two statements were recorded before the Committee and in her statements she stated that she had gone along with applicant and in both the statements she did not disclose the fact that applicant also made physical relationship with her and on 14.9.2022 she was handed over to the Police by the Committee and Committee submitted its report in which it has been stated that victim loved the applicant and both wanted to perform marriage to each other.

¶10

He next submits that after that statement of the victim was

¶11

recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. and in both the statements on the instigation of her parents, victim started making allegation against the applicant that applicant has enticed her away and made physical relationship with her. He further submits that both the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C are contradictory with her earlier statements recorded before the Child Welfare Committee with regard to commission of rape.

¶12

He further submits that as per educational certificate victim is more than 17 years old girl and according to the CMO her radiological age varies between 18-19 years and this fact clearly suggests that actually victim is a major girl and she had gone according to her own wish along with applicant but subsequently on the instigation of informant she made allegation of rape against the applicant.

¶13

He further submits that applicant in the present matter is in jail since 15.9.2022.

¶14

Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that in both the statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. victim made allegation of rape against the applicant but both the learned counsels could not dispute the fact that in her earlier statements recorded by CWC she did not make any allegation of rape against the applicant and even as per report of CWC she and applicant were having love affairs and the rediologial age of the victim is about 18-19 years and even according to her school record she is more than 17 years.

¶15

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

¶16

Although victim in her both the statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. stated that applicant has enticed her away and made physical relationship with her but earlier to the recording of her statements under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C.when she was recovered then her statements were recorded by CWC but before CWC she did not make any allegation of rape against the applicant and stated that she had gone along with applicant and on 14.9.2022 CWC submitted its report which has been annexed as Annexure-7 to the affidavit filed in support of the present application which shows that applicant and victim loved each other. Further, according to the CMO, radiological age of the victim varies between 18-19 years and even from her school record it appears that she is more that 17 years old girl.

¶17

Therefore, from the discussions made above, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶18

Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶19

Let the applicant- Sanny Tomar be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶20

(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.

¶21

(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make 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 any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶22

(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and antisocial activity.

¶23

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.

¶24

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶25

Order Date :- 12.5.2023 SKM

¶26

Digitally signed by :- SHRAVANA KUMAR MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sanny Tomar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanny Tomar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hasim Vs State of U.P.

Rina Devi Vs State of U.P.

Vimlesh Vs State of U.P.

Aadil Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Bhriguram Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Kallu Vs State of U.P.and 3 Others