Allowed

Naushad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC27 May 2024/2553/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under Sections 354, 354(Ka) IPC and Sections 9(m)/10 POCSO Act. Applicant in custody since December 2023 with no criminal history; following Satender Kumar Antil, the court granted bail with standard conditions and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Naushad released on bail in Case Crime No.1181 of 2023 on personal bond and two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each with conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:40408

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2553 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Naushad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Akashdeep Shukla,Suchendra Kumar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

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

¶7

None appears on behalf of the complainant respondent despite service of notice.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the allegations levelled against the applicant are punishable for a term less than seven years. The applicant is in custody since 5.12.2023 having no criminal history. Hence, the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶9

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

¶10

Considering the fact that the offences are punishable for a term not less than seven years and the applicant is languishing in jail since 5.12.2023 having no criminal history of the same offence, following the the law laid down in the case of Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another : 2021 (1) SCC 773 , I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to bail.

¶11

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant Naushad be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.1181 of 2023, under Sections 354, 354 (Ka) I.P.C. and Section 9m/10 of the POCSO Act, Police Station Kotwali Sadar, District Kheri 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 :-

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

(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.

¶16

Order Date :- 27.5.2024

¶17

Shukla

¶18

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

Naushad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naushad v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Faiz Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Lko.

Dileep Verma alias D.K. alias Avinash alias Chaudhary Vs The State of U.P. through Principal Secretary Home Govt. of U.P. Civil Secretariat, Lucknow.

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

Mohd. Sarik Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Vikas Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Alok Kumar Mitra Vs Union of India and Another