Allowed

Chhottan Tiwari Urf Muratdhwaj v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Mar 2023BAIL/8085/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application regarding a sexual assault charge under IPC 376, the court considered the delay in FIR, alleged false implication, and evidence regarding the victim's age. The court held that the applicant had made out a case for bail at this stage without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties subject to specific conditions.

Chhottan Tiwari Urf Muratdhwaj Vs State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8085 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Chhottan Tiwari Urf Muratdhwaj Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vishnu Murti Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

List has been revised.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri R.P. Patel, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 503 of 2022, under Sections 452, 376(1), 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Manjhanpur, District Kaushambi, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have barged into the house of the informant on 12.9.2022 and is stated to have sexually assaulted his daughter aged about 17 years. After the said act, the victim is stated to have raised alarm at which the family members of the victim are stated to have rushed to the place of occurrence. Seeing them, the applicant is stated to have run away from the scene of occurrence. When the matter was reported to the family members of the applicant, they are even stated to have assaulted them and also are stated to have hurled abuses besides criminally intimidating them.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. Learned counsel has further stated that the medical report does not corroborate the prosecution story. As per the ossification test report, the age of the victim is 17 years. Learned counsel has next stated that with respect to the age of the victim, a leverage of two years can be granted to the applicant on the upper side in view of the settled law of the Apex Court. Learned counsel has also stated that the FIR is delayed by 11 days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. As per the school certificate, the age of the victim stands to be more than 20 years. The victim is the consenting party.

¶10

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 12.10.2022. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, pending trial and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment, at this stage, 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 .

¶13

Let the applicant- Chhottan Tiwari Urf Muratdhwaj 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.

¶14

i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶15

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 indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶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, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶20

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶21

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 on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶22

Order Date :- 13.3.2023 Shalini

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Chhottan Tiwari Urf Muratdhwaj v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chhottan Tiwari Urf Muratdhwaj v. State of U.P.

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

Parvesh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Piyush @ Tusa Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sunil Vs State of U.P.

Yatendra Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Smt Muliya Vs State of U.P.

Jaiveer Singh Vs State of U.P.