Allowed

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

Allahabad HC19 Feb 2024/209/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application of an accused charged with enticing away a minor girl and offences under Sections 363/376/120-B IPC, Section 3/4 POCSO Act and Section 66 IT Act. The victim denied the prosecution story in her Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. statements. The court allowed regular bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties, subject to stated conditions including no tampering or witness intimidation.

Imamul Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:14745

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 209 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Imamul Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Kr. Chaudhary Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Irfan Alam

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

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

¶7

None appears for the complainant.

¶8

The present bail application has been filed by accused-applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.48 of 2023 under Section 363, 376, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act and Section 66 I.T. Act, Police Station Laliya, District Balrampur.

¶9

It is alleged in the First Information Report that minor daughter of the informant while she went to ease out on 1.3.2023 at about 7.00 p.m. has been enticed away by the applicant as he had a bad eye on the victim.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that perusal of the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. shows that victim was in relationship with the applicant since last four years. Allegation of rape has not been leveled on the applicant. She has denied the prosecution story. Further she has stated that she is married

¶11

with the applicant. While giving statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. the victim has again denied the prosecution case. Again no allegation of rape has been leveled on the applicant. She has denied to undergo the medical examination.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer, however, could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶13

On due consideration to the arguments advanced; perusal of the record; statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and Section 164 Cr.P.C.; denial of the victim to undergo medical examination; the victim is 17 years old as per the radiological examination; the applicant has no criminal history; the applicant is in jail since 12.6.2023 and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶14

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Imamul be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

(iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any

¶18

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.

¶19

(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.

¶20

(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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶21

(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.

¶22

Order Date :- 19.2.2024 Madhu

¶23

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Imamul v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home 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

Pagula Devi @ Sukhraji Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Ashok Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home

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

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

Shakeel Ahmed Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.