Allowed

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

Allahabad HC15 Feb 2023BAIL/7346/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed bail to the applicant in a case involving kidnapping and sexual offences against a minor. Applicant claimed false implication and victim's consent. Court granted bail without expressing opinion on merits subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two heavy sureties subject to standard conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7346 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Suraj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Kumar Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

List has been revised.

¶6

As informed by learned A.G.A., notice to the informant has been served on 11.2.2023.

¶7

Heard Shri Akhilesh Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Shri Ram Mohit Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.465 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)N I.P.C. & 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Hafizganj, District Bareilly, during the pendency of trial.

¶9

As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have enticed away the minor daughter of the informant on 5.10.2022 in the intervening night of 5-6.10.2022.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel has stated that FIR is delayed by about twenty hours and there is no explanation for said delay caused. Learned counsel has stated that victim is a consenting party and her age as per her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is 17 years. Learned counsel has stated that a leverage of two years on the upper side may be granted to the applicant. Learned counsel has stated that as per the said statement recorded by the Magistrate the victim has stated that she had gone with the applicant out of her own sweet will and married him in a temple and no body had enticed her away. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 1.11.2022. In case, the

¶11

applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but could not dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant- Suraj involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

¶15

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii). The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶16

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶18

(v) 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 officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶20

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶21

Order Date :- 15.2.2023 Vikas

¶22

Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj 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

Surendra @ Kali Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Vs State of U.P.

Viresh Vs State of U.P.

Gaurav Vs State of U.P.

Amit Adjariya Vs State of U.P.

Ramniwas Ram and Another Vs State of U.P.