Allowed

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

Allahabad HC24 May 2024/1824/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a bail application filed by Amit Kumar, charged under Sections 328 and 354 IPC read with POCSO Act. The judge released him after considering the low quantum of sentence and absence of criminal history.

What did the court decide?

Amit Kumar released on bail with personal bonds and two sureties of Rs.20,000 each on conditions of attending hearings and not tampering with evidence.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:39776

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1824 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Amit Kumar

¶5

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 3 Others

¶6

Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Kumar Misra,Shashin Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶7

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶9

None appears on behalf of the respondent no.2 despite service of notice.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant is charged for an offence under Sections 328 and 354 I.P.C. readwith Section 7/8 of the POCSO Act punishable for a term less than seven years. Hence, the applicant who is languishing in jail since 9.11.2023 having no criminal history, may be enlarged on bail.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶12

Considering the offence being punishable with a term less than seven years coupled with the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 9.11.2023 having no criminal history, without expressing any opinion on merit, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶13

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant Amit Kumar be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.0662 of 2023, under Sections 328, 354 I.P.C. and Sections 7/8 of the POCSO Act, Police Station Gangaghat, District Unnao 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 :-

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

(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 ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

Order Date :- 24.5.2024

¶19

Shukla

¶20

Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Chitnesh Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Dept. Lko.

Rizwan Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Shailendra Pratap Pankaj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

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

Sani Verma @ Rohit vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko.

Mohd. Salman vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. U.P.