Allowed

Suraj Gupta v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt, Govt. of U.P. Civil Secrtt. Lko. and Others

Allahabad HC20 Feb 2024/1524/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted bail to the applicant in a POCSO case alleging sexual assault. Relied on the victim's prior statement denying rape and lack of examined witnesses. Imposed strict conditions regarding witness tampering and appearance.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail after furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions against tampering with evidence/witnesses and ensuring court appearance.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:14993

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1524 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Suraj Gupta

¶5

Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt, Govt. Of U.P. Civil Secrtt. Lko. And Others

¶6

Counsel for Applicant :- Shishir Pradhan,Mohd. Ateeq Khan,Siddhartha Kumar,Suvivek Bajpai,Uday Bhanu Singh

¶7

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶8

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶9

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record. None appears for the complainant.

¶10

2. It is alleged in the prosecution case that minor daughter of the informant is studying in Class-X. She complained stomach pain for the last may days. She was brought to Shimla for check-up in KNH Hospital. The doctor opined that she is pregnant. On being enquired, she told that when we had gone to our village Jijauli, Lucknow, the accused applicant forcibly committed wrong with her.

¶11

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim in her statement sunder sections 161 and 164 CrPC has not made any allegation of rape against the applicant; rather she has stated that she on her own accord went away with the applicant 5-6 months ago. According to her statement, she is studying in Class-X. No radiological examination qua age has been got conducted by the I.O., of the victim. She was already studying in Class-X and there is every possibility that she may be found major.

¶12

He further submits that the actual age of the victim is to be determined during trial as held by this Court in Crl. Misc. Bail

¶13

Application No.55026 of 2021 Monish vs. State.

¶14

The applicant has been falsely implicated. The applicant has no previous criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 15.6.2022.

¶15

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released on bail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶16

4. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶17

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, statements of the victim under sections 161 and 164 CrPC, till date not a single prosecution witness has been examined as submitted by the applicant's counsel, the fact that the applicant has no criminal history, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the period for which the applicant is in jail and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶18

6. Let the applicant Suraj Gupta, involved in Case Crime No.0066 of 2022 under sections 376(3) I.P.C., 5/6 POCSO Act, P.S. Shivratanganj, district Amethi, be released on bail 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶19

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶20

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶21

(iii) 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.

¶22

(iv) 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.

¶23

(v) 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 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶24

(vi) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. 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 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶25

7. The application is allowed accordingly.

¶26

Order Date :- 20.2.2024 kkb/

¶27

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

Suraj Gupta v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt, Govt. of U.P. Civil Secrtt. Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj Gupta v. the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt, Govt. of U.P. Civil Secrtt. Lko. and 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

Similar cases

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

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

Sunil Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko

Saurabh Alias Sajan Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Alok Kumar Tripathi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Dept. of Home, Lko

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