Dismissed

Umesh Giri v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and 3 Others

Allahabad HC6 Aug 2024/3965/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a second bail application regarding alleged rape and sexual offences under IPC and POCSO against a 12-year-old girl, the court noted the prosecutrix's medical report supporting rape. Despite applicant claims of false implication and enmity, the court held he was not entitled to bail and rejected the application.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected; applicant not entitled to be released on bail.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:54059

¶2

Court No. - 32

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3965 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Umesh Giri Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Narendra Pratap Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶6

1. Case has been taken up through video conferencing.

¶7

2. As per office report dated 09.05.2024, notice has been served upon opposite party no.2 but none has appeared on behalf of complainant/opposite party no.2 to press the present bail application.

¶8

3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Gyanandra Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶9

4. The present second bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 208 of 2022 under Sections 376, 328, 504, 506 IPC and 5/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Ahirauli District Ambedkar Nagar.

¶10

5. This is second bail application as the first bail application of the applicant was dismissed as not pressed vide order dated 05.10.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.1941 of 2023.

¶11

6. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has also submitted that there is contradiction in the statements of the prosecutrix recorded under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the mother of the prosecutrix had sold the land, which was opposed by the brother of the prosecutrix and the enmity was going on between the brother and the mother of the prosecutrix. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is used to

¶12

help the mother of the prosecutrix, who is widow and the applicant is friend of the her father (dead). Since the applicant used to help the mother of the prosecutrix, therefore, the applicant has been falsely implicated. It has also been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has no previous criminal history as such he should be released on bail.

¶13

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has invited attention of this Court towards the statement of the P.W.-2, prosecutrix, who deposed before the court that the applicant pressed her breasts and committed sexual offence by raping her. The medical report of the prosecutrix indicates that swelling is present on private parts with reddish bruise mark, Hymen torn and she was aged about 12 years. It has been submitted by learned A.G.A. that the statement of prosecutrix before the court further goes to indicates that the prosecutrix was kept in hotel for five days and her mother assisted the accused in commission of crime.

¶14

8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the argument of learned A.G.A. that the prosecutrix was 12 years of age at the relevant time and the medical report is also supporting the prosecution case as mentioned in the FIR as well as in the statement of the proseuctrix recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C.,therefore, I am of the opinion that the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶15

6. Accordingly, the bail application of the applicant is rejected .

¶16

(Brij Raj Singh, J.)

¶17

Order Date :- 6.8.2024 dk/

¶18

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

Umesh Giri v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Umesh Giri v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 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

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

Pappu Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Bhallu Alias Virendra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko

Sakrun Nisha vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Mansoor Alam Khan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.N Home Lko and Another

Qumar Jahan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko