Allowed

Sher Ali v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC9 Sept 2024/1068/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hearing an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. involving charges of enticement and child sexual offences, the court converted an earlier interim order into an absolute bail order after the charge-sheet was filed and considering specific ingredient of the case.

What did the court decide?

The application for anticipatory bail is allowed; the accused is directed to surrender if summoned and released on bail by the trial court with specific conditions.

Sher Ali Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:62103

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1068 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Sher Ali Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. U.P. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Piyush Pathak,Himadri Goswami Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

The present application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail apprehending arrest in FIR/ Case Crime No.0125/2022, under Sections 363, 366-A, 342, 506 IPC and Section 16/17 of POCSO Act, Police Station Aaspur Devsara, District Pratapgarh.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State .

¶8

The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court while granting interim protection vide order dated 21.05.2024 has passed the following order:-

¶9

"1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The present anticipatory bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Sher Ali in Case Crime No.0125/2022, under Sections 363, 366-A, 342, 506 IPC and Section 16/17 of POCSO Act, Police Station Aaspur Devsara, District Pratapgarh with the prayer to enlarge him on anticipatory bail as he is apprehending arrest in the above-mentioned case. 3. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant argued that the main accused being Juvenile has been granted bail vide order dated 20.2.2024 passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Crl. Revision No.21 of 2024 on the ground of the main accused being juvenile and considering the provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act, the benefit was granted to the main accused. 4. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that no chargesheet has been filed against the applicant and the investigation is still going on. It is further argued that in terms

¶10

of the allegations levelled in the F.I.R., it was alleged that the daughter of the informant was enticed away by the main accused and the applicant was not named in the F.I.R. Subsequently, the name of the applicant of helping the accused came in the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. In the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the victim admitted her proximity with the main accused and stated that she had gone on on her own. The allegations against the applicant in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. are of helping in enticing away the daughter of the informant. Thus, interim protection be granted to him pending the instant anticipatory bail application. 5. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposes the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant by citing the heinousness of the offences.

¶11

6. List this case after six weeks by which date the State as well as the informant/ complainant may file counter affidavit/ objections.

¶12

7. Considering the statements of the victim under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. to the effect that the victim had gone alongwith the main accused whom she knew for the last few years, and thereafter she stayed with him for some times, a case for grant of anticipatory bail is made out. 8. As an interim measure, it is provided that till the next date of listing, in the event of arrest of the applicant-Sher Ali in Case Crime No. 0125 of 2022 (supra), he shall be released on anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond to the Station House Officer of the Police Station concerned/ Investigating Officer/ Arresting Officer with the following conditions :-

¶13

(1) The applicant shall furnish an undertaking to the investigating officer to cooperate with the investigation and make himself available for interrogation or for discovery of any fact by a police officer as and when required ; (2) 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 ; (3) The applicant shall not leave the country without the previous permission of the Court."

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that charge-sheet in the matter has been filed. Applicant has co-operated in the investigation and further undertakes to cooperate in the trial.

¶15

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application, however, could not dispute the fact that charge-sheet in the matter has been filed.

¶16

On due consideration to the submissions advanced, perusal of the record so also the fact that charge-sheet in the matter has been filed, varied statements of the victim under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. and the fact that victim went away with the main accused who was known to her for several years, he has cooperated in the investigation and he shall cooperate in the trial, the interim protection granted by this Court vide order dated 21.05.2024 is made absolute in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98.

¶17

In view of the above, since, charge-sheet in the matter has been filed, the accused applicant- Sher Ali is directed to surrender before trial court, if he is summoned to face trial for offence in question. The accused applicant shall be released on bail by the trial court on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶18

(i) 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 tamper with the evidence;

¶19

(ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶20

(iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶21

(iv)The applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶22

(v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;

¶23

Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed.

¶24

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

¶25

In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed.

¶26

Order Date :- 9.9.2024 Saurabh Yadav/-

¶27

Digitally signed by :- SAURABH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sher Ali v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sher Ali v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Hem Karan Mathur Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Dept. of Home Lko. and Others

Chandra Prakash Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Sri. Avnish Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Vinod Kumar Tiwari @ Lallu Maharaj vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Faizi Ahmad @ Jaleel Ahmad vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 2 Others

Yashpal Diwakar vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin. Secy. Home Lko