Allowed

Lavkush v. State of U.P and 3 Others

Allahabad HC14 Mar 2023BAIL/57730/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a bail application in a Special Sessions case involving offences under IPC 376, IPC 506, and the POCSO Act. The High Court, while noting the serious nature of the charges and unopposed factual submissions by the state, held that the applicant made out a case for bail and ordered his release.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond and two sureties under specified conditions prohibiting witness tampering, criminal activity, and adjournments.

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

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 57730 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Lavkush Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shashwat Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The instant application for bail has been moved on behalf of the applicant, Lavkush with the prayer to enlarge him on bail in Special Sessions Case No.301 of 2022, under Sections 376 and 506 IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Chauk, District Maharajganj, during pendency of the trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the first information report is based on false and fabricated facts. The accused/ applicant is innocent who has been falsely implicated in this case. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that considering the false case the concerned police station did not lodge the FIR against the applicant and declined the same. Even the complaint under Section 156(3) CrPC was not liable to be allowed. Hence, it was converted by the concerned court into a complaint. No medical evidence is available. It is further contended that there was enmity between Vidyawati, grandmother of the accused contested the village pradhan election against one Sangeeta in which Sangeeta was elected as gram pradhan. The complainant and her family members are serving in the house of elected village pradhan, Sangeeta. Sangeeta being rival on account of contest by the applicant's grandmother, has persuaded them to lodge such false complaint against the grand son of the defeated candidate.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant further contended that there is embellishment, contradiction and improvement in the statement of the witnesses under Section 202 CrPC contrary to the averments of the complaint and the evidence of the complainant PW-1. PW-2, Fatima, sister of the victim has deposed that applicant accused had also caused injury from knife and when she came to the house there was bleeding from her hands. Learned counsel for the applicant further contends that no medical evidence in this regard too has been produced to strengthen story of PW-2. The very basis of the incident that

¶9

since there was no latrine room in the house of the complainant, therefore, the victim had gone out of the village for her daily routines in the night. In this regard learned counsel for the applicant pointed out the documents filed as annexure-4 to the affidavit filed in support of this bail application in which at serial no.27 it is mentioned that under the scheme a toilet has been constructed nearby the house of the victim to which learned counsel for the applicant contends that when the latrine room was very much available in the house of the victim, there was no occasion to go for her daily routine out of the house and the village. He has also submitted that the accused/applicant is languishing in jail since 28.10.2022 who has no previous criminal history. His further submission is that in case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and he will also fully cooperate with the trial court in getting the trial concluded expeditiously. He has also submitted that the applicant will not intimidate or pressurize the witnesses or any other persons acquainted with the facts of the present case.

¶10

Per contra, learned AGA for the State has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail. However, he has been unable to dispute the other factual submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

Having heard learned counsel for applicant, learned AGA for State and upon consideration of evidence on record, accusations made as well as complicity of applicant but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, applicant has made out a case for bail.

¶12

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶13

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

¶14

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial;

¶15

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment;

¶16

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail;

¶17

The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any

¶18

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;

¶19

The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence, in case the witnesses are present in court;

¶20

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.

¶21

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

¶22

It is made clear that the trial of the aforesaid case shall be conducted without being influenced by any observation made herein above which are confined to the disposal of the instant application for bail.

¶23

Order Date :- 14.3.2023 Shahroz

¶24

Digitally signed by :- SHAHROJ ALAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Lavkush v. State of U.P and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Lavkush 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

Sonu Vs State of U.P

Dharmendra Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Sudhakar Vs State of U.P.

Bobeen @ Neeraj Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ayub and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Tanvir Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others