Allowed

Ankul Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Allahabad HC25 Oct 2024/11173/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed a bail application filed by Ankul Kumar in a case involving offences under the BNS and PoCSO Act. The court noted that the prosecutrix has attained majority according to the Juvenile Welfare Board order and resides with the applicant. The court imposed conditions to protect her interest and ensure the applicant's cooperation with the trial.

What did the court decide?

Relief: Applicant to be released on bail with personal bond and two sureties on conditions of marriage registration, protection of prosecutrix, and regular court attendance.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:72069

¶2

Court No. - 11

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11173 of 2024 Applicant :- Ankul Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ajeet Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶5

1. Heard Sri Ajeet Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Bhanu Pratap Singh, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State, Sri Pawan Kumar Pandey, learned counsel, who has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant/ informant and filed Vakalatnama on his behalf and Sri Ankush Pandey, learned counsel, who has put in appearance on behalf of the victim and filed Vakalatnama on her behalf, the same are taken on record. Sri Ajeet Kumar Singh has filed the supplementary affidavit, today in the Court, the same is also taken on record.

¶6

2. The victim (X) is also present in the Court along with her counsel namely Sri Ankush Pandey

¶7

3. As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant (Ankul Kumar) is languishing in jail since 04.08.2024 in Case Crime No.384 of 2024, under Sections 137 (2), 87, 64(1) of Bharatiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 (here-in-after referred to as the "BNS") and Section 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station-Bilgram, District-Hardoi.

¶8

4. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in this case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story. As a matter of fact, the present applicant has got married with the prosecutrix and presently the prosecutrix is residing in his house with his parents.

¶9

5. Attention has been drawn towards Annexure No.3 of the bail application, which is an order dated 27.08.2024 passed by the Juvenile Welfare Board, Hardoi, whereby the Board after considering the material produced before the Board and recording the statement of some person found that the prosecutrix is aged about 18 years, two months and fifteen days. Therefore, the Board considered that since the prosecutrix is above 18 years and she is willing to live at the place of her choice the Board directed the Superintendent, Government Juvenile Hostel (Female) concerned to release the prosecutrix so that she could live at the place where she is willing to live.

¶10

6. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that pursuant to the aforesaid order of the Board, the prosecutrix released from the Government Female Hostel and she is living with the parents of the applicant.

¶11

7. Since the prosecutrix is present in the Court, therefore, this Court asked her as to whether she is living in the house of the present applicant, she categorically stated that she is living with her in-laws in the house of her husband (Ankul Kumar) with whom she got married.

¶12

8. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that if the present applicant is released on bail, he shall properly look-after his wife/ prosecutrix and shall ensure that she could live with him and his family members comfortably receiving all necessary facilities. Learned counsel for the applicant has undertaken on behalf of the present applicant that the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail, if so granted by this Court and shall abide by all terms and conditions of the bail order and shall cooperate with the trial proceedings.

¶13

9. Learned counsel for the prosecutrix has stated that the fact which has been apprised by the prosecutrix is correct fact and if this Court may direct she may file an affidavit.

¶14

10. Learned counsel for the complainant/ informant has stated that when the present applicant got married with his daughter she has not attained the marriageable age, therefore, that marriage is meaningless. However, on the order being passed by the Board dated 27.08.2024 he has stated that appeal has already been filed before the Appellate Court challenging the order dated 27.08.2024 of the Board.

¶15

11. Learned Additional Government Advocate has also submitted that at the time of marriage of the prosecutrix with the applicant, she has not attained the marriageable age but after submission of learned counsel for the applicant he has stated that any appropriate order may be passed protecting the interest of the prosecutrix.

¶16

12. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the issue, since the prosecutrix has stated that she is living with the family members of the present applicant and she has got married with him and during investigation she has not alleged anything against the present applicant and considering the undertaking of the present applicant that he shall look-after the prosecutrix properly and shall not misuse the liberty of bail, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶17

13. Accordingly, the instant bail application is allowed.

¶18

14. Let the applicant (Ankul Kumar) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶19

(i) The applicant is directed to get his marriage registered before the Registrar of Marriages concerned if the prosecutrix has attained the marriageable age as on the date of registration and he shall look-after the prosecutrix properly and shall ensure that she is provided all the necessary things

¶20

which are required to live a normal comfortable life.

¶21

(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶22

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 269 of the B.N.S., 2023.

¶23

(iv) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 84 of B.N.S.S., 2023 is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 208 of the B.N.S., 2023.

¶24

(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 351 of B.N.S.S., 2023. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. The present applicant shall not leave the country without prior permission of the Court.

¶25

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]

¶26

Order Date :- 25.10.2024 Suresh/

¶27

Digitally signed by :- SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ankul Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ankul Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Prithvi Kannaujia Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Vidya Rani Thru. Next Friend Ved Prakash Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Vipin Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Durgesh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Ram Ajor Giri vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Revenue Lko and 4 Others

Mahesh Prasad vs State of U.P. Thru. the Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Public Works Lko. and 2 Others