Allowed

Akash Rawat v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Others

Allahabad HC4 Jan 2024/10/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed the bail application for Akash Rawat, a missing person accused of offenses under IPC and POCSO. The court relied on the victim's statements indicating the encounter was consensual and noted the applicant's clean criminal record, granting bail with personal and special bonds.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and POCSO Act by furnishing personal bonds and two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each.

Akash Rawat Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:1086

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Akash Rawat Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shailendra Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶7

2. None turned up on behalf of the complainant despite notice.

¶8

3 . In terms of the F.I.R., a missing person report was lodged, the name of the applicant was disclosed in the F.I.R. Subsequently, in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the victim stated that she had gone along with Akash to Ayodhya. She also stated that nothing wrong was done to her. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she stated that she had gone with Akash to Ayodhya and nothing wrong was done to her. She also expressed willingness to go with the applicant.

¶9

4 . In view of the said statements, the submission of the counsel for the applicant is that no allegation of an offence under Section 376 IPC was leveled either in the FIR or in the two statements. The applicant has no criminal history and he is in jail since 12.09.2023.

¶10

5. Learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer.

¶11

6. Considering the two statements of the victim,

¶12

wherein she disclosed that she had gone with the applicant out of her own free will and volition and nothing wrong was done to her, more so, when the age of the victim is not yet determined, which is to be done at the time of trial and there is nothing on record to demonstrate that the applicant if enlarged on bail, would in any way adversely affect the trial and without expressing any opinion on merit, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶13

7. Let the applicant Akash Rawat be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No. 0367 of 2023, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Jaidpur, District Barabanki, on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶14

(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;

¶15

(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and

¶16

(c) 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 ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence.

¶17

Order Date :- 4.1.2024 Arun

¶18

Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Akash Rawat v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akash Rawat v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Chhotelal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Lko. and 3 Others

Dilip and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Shrawan Alias Gola Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy. Home and 3 Others

Islam @ Munna Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Ram Bhajan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko.

Akhilesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others