Ritik Kumar Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Lucknow and Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:20600

Court No. - 14

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2245 of 2024

Applicant :- Ritik Kumar Shukla Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. The Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Lucknow And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

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

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim as per the radiological examination is 17 years old. Margin of error in ascertaining age by radiological examination is two years on either side as held by Supreme Court in Jaya Mala versus Home Secretary, Government of Jammu & Kashmir and others (1982)2 SCC 538 and the applicant being the accused is entitled for giving the benefit on higher side.

¶8

It has been further submitted that she is a consenting party. In the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she has admitted that she was in relationship with the applicant and lived with the applicant for the past one year. While giving statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has again admitted what she had stated in the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., however, improvement has been made by the victim that she was residing with the applicant in Gomti Nagar in a room for three months and thereafter a room was taken in Aishbag and both of them started living there. No force has been applied by the applicant. She wants to live with the applicant. No corroborative medical injury has been found in the medico-legal examination of the victim.

¶9

It is further submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 28.12.2023 without having any criminal antecedent. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

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.

¶11

On due consideration to the statements of the victim recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C.; lack of corroborative medical evidence; improvement has been made by the victim in her statement, coupled with the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 28.12.2023 without having any criminal history and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶12

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant, Ritik Kumar Shukla, involved in Case Crime/FIR No. 184/2023, under Sections 376/504 IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station - Naka Hindola, District - Lucknow, 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:-

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

(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

¶17

evidence.

¶18

(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.

¶19

(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.

¶20

(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.

¶21

Order Date :- 7.3.2024 R.C.

¶22

Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ritik Kumar Shukla v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Lucknow and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ritik Kumar Shukla v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Lucknow and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Danish Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, U.P. Lucknow and 3 Others

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

Raj Gupta Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and 3 Others

Santosh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addil. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Gov. Civil Secrt. Lko.

Virendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Munni Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. Home Lucknow