Allowed

Pintu v. State of U.P Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Civil Secrt. Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC16 Feb 2024/1731/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application allowed for applicant accused under IPC and POCSO for enticing a minor. Court noted victim failed to support prosecution story and applicant has no antecedents.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each subject to undertaking to attend hearings and not tamper with evidence.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:13938

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1731 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Pintu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Civil Secrt. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Kumar Verma,Arun Prakash Verma,Shalini Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record. Despite service of notice, no one appeared on behalf of the complainant.

¶7

2 . The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.205 of 2023, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Baghauli, District Hardoi.

¶8

3 . The FIR in question was lodged as a missing person report with the allegation that the applicant had enticed the daughter of the informant. In the statement under Sections 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C., the victim did not support the prosecution story and stated that she had gone out of her own freewill and physical relations were also formed. The tentative age of the victim is 19 years.

¶9

4. Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the bail prayer.

¶10

5. Considering the statements under Sections 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C., prima facie, she did not support the prosecution story and even the medical report does not support the prosecution case coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is in custody since 22.08.2023, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶11

6. Let the applicant Pintu be released on bail in the aforesaid first information report on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the 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 :- 16.2.2024 akverma

¶16

Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Pintu v. State of U.P Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Civil Secrt. Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pintu v. State of U.P Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Civil Secrt. 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

Sonu Alias Ajit Raidas Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Gurjeet Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Imran Ali Vs State of U.P. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Islam @ Munna Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lucknow

Md. Azam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt., Lko.

Shiv Nath Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Food and Civil Supply Civil Secrt. Lko. and 2 Other