Allowed

Gulam Mohammad @ Allarakha v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC21 Jun 2024/2652/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed bail to the applicant in a rape and POCSO case where the star witness had concluded their statement, deeming it a fit case for bail with strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on personal bond with two sureties subject to conditions regarding attendance, no commission of further offences, and regular court appearance.

Gulam Mohammad @ Allarakha Vs State of U.P… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:43828

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2652 of 2023 Applicant :- Gulam Mohammad @ Allarakha Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. And 3 Others

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Singh,Deo Prakash Srivastava,Krishana Kumar Singh

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ravi Kant Pandey

¶6

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶8

The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.0105/2022 under Sections – 376 D IPC and 5/6 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station - Khodare, District - Gonda, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. As per the prosecution case the FIR was lodged after two days from the date of alleged incident. Charge sheet was filed by the Investigating Officer and the applicant is in jail since 17.7.2022. As the statement of the victim as well as informant has already been recorded and in near future there is no possibility of conclusion of trial. Applicant does not have any criminal antecedent, therefore, he may be enlarged on bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the prayer of the applicant and submitted that the victim in her deposition before the Court has admitted that applicant made physical relations with her, therefore, he is not entitled for bail.

¶11

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and going through the contents of the FIR as well as the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 CrPC and medico legal report as well as deposition of PW-1 and PW-2, informant as well as victim, as the statement of star witness has already been concluded before the trial court there is no possibility of tampering with the evidence, only formal witnesses are to be examined, hence, it is a fit case for bail.

¶12

Let applicant – Gulam Mohammad alias Allarakha be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶13

(i) The applicant shall not commit or participate in any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶14

(ii) 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

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

¶16

(iv) 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 IPC.

¶17

(v) 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. may be issued and if 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 IPC.

¶18

(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶20

Order Date :- 21.6.2024 mks

¶21

Digitally signed by :- MANISH SAXENA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Gulam Mohammad @ Allarakha v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gulam Mohammad @ Allarakha v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. 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

Similar cases

Atul Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow

Ram Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

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

Nadeem Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Meera Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Meera Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko.