Allowed

Guddu @ Suresh Kumar Sharma v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Allahabad HC2 Feb 2024/1204/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application for bail under Section 363, 366, 376 IPC and POCSO, the Allahabad High Court allowed the request, relying on the victim's tentative age being above 18 and the applicant's lack of prior criminal record, despite opposition by the AGA. Bail was granted subject to a personal bond and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail in FIR No. 100 of 2021 on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs. 20,000/- each.

Guddu @ Suresh Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:9858

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1204 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Guddu @ Suresh Kumar Sharma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Lko. And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Pravin Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

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

¶7

2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.100 of 2021, under Section 363, 366, 376 IPC & Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, P.S. Maharajganj, District Rae Bareli.

¶8

3. In terms of the FIR it was alleged that the daughter of the informant was lured by some unknown persons and subsequently, in the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the victim disclosed her age as 18 years and stated that she was in love with the applicant and had gone to him to Allahabad. In the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. also, she had stated that she had gone to her friend one Priya and thereafter, she went to the applicant at Allahabad. As per the tentative certificate issued by the Principal, the date of birth of the victim is 18.06.2003.

¶9

4. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application.

¶10

5. Considering the two statements favouring the applicant and the tentative age of the victim being above 17 years coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal history and is in custody since 10.10.2021, he is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed.

¶11

6. Let the applicant Guddu @ Suresh Kumar Sharma 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:

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

(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.

¶15

Order Date :- 2.2.2024 nishant

¶16

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

Guddu @ Suresh Kumar Sharma v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Guddu @ Suresh Kumar Sharma v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, 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

Sandeep Kumar Awasthi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow

Billa @ Raja Ram Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Shivam Pathak Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Baba @ Jagmohan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. Lko. and Others

Suraj Pratap Rai Alias Suraj Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko.

Pranav Tewari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.