Allowed¶9

Mohit Kevat v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Allahabad HC1 Oct 2024/11891/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench (2024:AHC-LKO:68068), Pankaj Bhatia, J., order dated 1.10.2024 — bail application allowed; Mohit Kevat v. State of U.P., Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 11891 of 2022; FIR No. 241 of 2021, P.S. Shivratanganj, District Amethi; offences under Sections 363, 366, 376(3) IPC and Section 5/6 POCSO Act; minor victim (age 15 disclosed, FIR stated 19), enticement and marriage on false pretext at Gwalior; victim and two witnesses examined in trial; custody since 02.01.2022; two sureties of Rs. 20,000/- each.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to applicant Mohit Kevat in FIR No. 241 of 2021 on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs. 20,000/- each, subject to the stated conditions. ¶9

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail granted to applicant Mohit Kevat in FIR No. 241 of 2021 on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs. 20,000/- each, subject to the stated conditions.

¶9

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Mohit Kevat, in custody since 02.01.2022 in FIR No. 241 of 2021 under Sections 363, 366, 376(3) IPC and Section 5/6 POCSO Act, is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶5

Court's answer

Since the statement of the victim and the statements of two other witnesses have been recorded and there is no material on record to suggest that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, can adversely affect the trial, the applicant, who is in custody since 02.01.2022, is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶9

Ratio / Principle

The applicant Mohit Kevat is to be released on bail in the aforesaid FIR on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs. 20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions: undertaking to attend hearings; not committing any similar offence; and not directly or indirectly inducing, threatening or promising any person acquainted with the facts so as to dissuade disclosure or tamper with evidence.

¶10

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted — Offences under Sections 363, 366, 376(3) IPC and Section 5/6 POCSO Act (FIR No. 241 of 2021, P.S. Shivratanganj, District Amethi) — FIR lodged as missing person report alleging informant's daughter, aged about 19 years, was enticed by applicant — victim's statement disclosed her age as 15 years and that the applicant took her to Gwalior on the false pretext of marriage where both married at a temple — during trial, statement of the victim and of two other witnesses recorded — no material on record to suggest the applicant, if enlarged on bail, could adversely affect the trial — applicant in custody since 02.01.2022 — bail allowed on personal bond with two sureties of Rs. 20,000/- each, with conditions against committing similar offences, inducement/threat to witnesses and tampering with evidence.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:68068

¶2

Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11891 of 2022 Applicant :- Mohit Kevat Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Bharat Kumar Dixit,Jaikaran Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶4

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.

¶5

2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.241 of 2021, under Section 363, 366, 376(3) of IPC & Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, P.S. Shivratanganj, District Amethi.

¶6

3. The FIR in question was lodged as a missing person report alleging that the informant's daughter aged about 19 years was enticed by the applicant. Subsequently, the victim gave a statement that on the false pretext of marriage, the applicant had taken her to Gwalior and both of them had married at a temple. She disclosed her age as 15 years.

¶7

4. It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that during trial, the victim's statement has been recorded wherein she has also stated that she was recovered from Gwalior.

¶8

5. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application.

¶9

6. Considering the fact that the statement of the victim has been recorded and statement of two other witnesses have also been recorded, there is no material on record to suggest that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, can adversely affect the trial, as such, the applicant who is in custody since 02.01.2022 is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed.

¶10

7. Let the applicant Mohit Kevat be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions:

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

(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 officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶14

Order Date :- 1.10.2024 nishant

¶15

Digitally signed by :- NISHANT MOHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohit Kevat v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohit Kevat v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anil Singh @ Anil Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home

Rakesh Kumar Chaube Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Shiv Shakti Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lucknow

Sirtaj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Anand Singh Alias Jhinaku Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home, Lko. and 3 Others

Mohammad Danish Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home and 3 Others