Allowed

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

Allahabad HC12 May 2023BAIL/6046/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application filed under Sections 363, 366, and 376 IPC and Section 5J(II)/6 POCSO, the Allahabad High Court allowed the applicant's bail. The court noted the victim's statements indicating a consensual marriage and the possibility that the victim was over 18 years old, despite initial charges alleging abduction. The application was disposed of without expressing an opinion on the merits

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties, subject to specific conditions regarding attendance and conduct.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:102944

¶2

Court No. - 74

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6046 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Kallu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Tripurari Pal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶7

As per office report dated 1.3.2023 notice has been served to opposite party no.2, the informant of the case.

¶8

Despite service of notice, none appeared on behalf of the informant.

¶9

Heard Sri Tripurari Pal, learned counsel for the applicant and Dr.S.B.Maurya, learned AGA-I, for the State.

¶10

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.171 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC and Section 5J(II)/6 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Sindhauli, District Shahjahanpur during pendency of the trial.

¶11

FIR of the present case was lodged against the applicant and two others under Section 363 IPC and according to the FIR, on 18.4.2022 applicant and other co-accused persons have enticed away the minor daughter of the informant aged about 16 years.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that entire allegation against the applicant is totally false and baseless and applicant neither enticed nor abducted the victim and victim according to her own wish had gone along with applicant and this fact is even evident from her statements under Sections 161

¶13

and 164 Cr.P.C. He further submits that victim was recovered on 10.11.2022, i.e., after about 7 months and in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. she stated that she had gone along with applicant and both performed marriage in a Temple.

¶14

He further submits that when the statement of victim was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. then she favoured the applicant and stated against her family members including the informant and stated that her family members forcibly wanted to perform her marriage with some other person after taking money, therefore, she had gone along with applicant.

¶15

He further submits that even from the statement of victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. it reflects that applicant refused to perform marriage with her as she was minor and on her insistence, applicant and victim performed marriage in a Temple and thereafter she also conceived but her parents caused her miscarriage and all these facts clearly suggests that applicant is innocent, therefore, he may be released on bail.

¶16

He further submits that applicant in the present matter is in jail since 8.12.2022.

¶17

Per contra, learned AGA although opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the argument on facts advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant. Learned AGA further conceded that according to the Doctor, radiological age of the victim is around 18 years and even as per her school record she is more than 17 years old girl.

¶18

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

¶19

Victim in her both the statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. categorically stated that she had gone along with applicant and both performed marriage and in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she made serious

¶20

allegation against her parents by stating that after receiving money her parents wanted to perform her marriage with some other fellow and she after marriage became pregnant but her pregnancy was terminated by her parents.

¶21

Further, from the record it reflects that victim is around 18 years old girl and applicant is in jail in the present matter since 8.12.2022.

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

Let the applicant- Kallu 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:-

¶25

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

¶26

(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.

¶27

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

¶28

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.

¶29

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

¶30

no bearing on the merits of the case during trial. Order Date :- 12.5.2023 SKM

¶31

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kallu 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

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

Bhriguram Mishra Vs State of U.P.