Allowed

Sahil v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Allahabad HC2 May 2024/4712/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed bail to the applicant in a case involving enticement and abduction of a minor. The court observed that the victim claims to be a major and that there is no apprehension of flight or tampering. Bail was granted on a personal bond with sureties.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on personal bond with two sureties subject to conditions regarding court attendance.

Sahil Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:34099

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4712 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Sahil Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Sinha,Ram Chandra Singh,Umang Agarwal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶7

By means of the instant bail application, the applicant seeks bail in respect of FIR/Case Crime No.0090/2024, under Sections 363, 366 IPC, Police Station Goshaiganj, District Lucknow.

¶8

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated even otherwise in light of the statement of the victim as well as the surrounding circumstances, prima-facie, the offence under Section 363 and 366 IPC are not made out.

¶9

It is further submitted that on the bare perusal of the averments made in the FIR, it is alleged that the applicant has enticed the victim, who is a minor. The daughter of the complainant left her home along with cash of Rs.35,000/- and a necklace (mangalsutra).

¶10

In the aforesaid backdrop, the attention has been drawn of the Court to an application which has been brought on record as Annexure No.7 to state that the said application was given by the victim herself to the police official concerned indicating that she is a major having full knowledge to understand good or bad. She is in a romantic relationship with the applicant and since the belonged to different caste, this relationship do not go well with the parents and it is considering the aforesaid, the FIR has been lodged. Apart from the aforesaid fact, the victim had already married to the applicant and wanted to stay with him.

¶11

The attention has also been drawn to the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., which has been brought on record as Annexure No.11, where she has categorically

¶12

reiterated her stand and denied the allegation regarding sexual assault and misbehave. It is in the aforesaid circumstances, it is urged that the applicant has been falsely framed and is languishing in jail since 03.03.2024. It is also submitted that the applicant does not have any criminal history and there is no apprehension that the applicant would flee from justice or tamper with any evidence or influence any witness. In the aforesaid circumstances, it is prayed that the applicant be enlarged on bail.

¶13

Learned A.G.A., on the basis of material in the case diary available with him, has opposed the prayer for bail, however, could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶14

Considering the rival submissions, the facts and circumstances of the case and the material available on record as well as considering the nature of allegations and accusation against the applicant, the severity of the punishment if convicted and the period of incarceration as well as the fact that no apprehension has been expressed by the learned AGA that the applicant is at the risk of fleeing justice or that he would tamper with evidence or influence any witness, hence, at this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶15

Let the applicant Sahil involved in FIR/Case Crime No.0090/2024, under Sections 363, 366 IPC, Police Station Goshaiganj, District Lucknow be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶16

At the time of executing required sureties the following conditions shall be imposed in the interest of justice.

¶17

(i) 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.

¶18

(ii) 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.

¶19

(iii) 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

¶20

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

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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.

¶22

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

¶23

Order Date :- 2.5.2024 Rakesh/-

¶24

Digitally signed by :- RAKESH PRAJAPAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sahil v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sahil v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

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

Rohit Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Dhanjay Kumar Yadav Vs Union of India Thru. Deputy Commissioner (P) Air Custom C.C.S.I. Airport Lko.

Hosala Prasad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Ram Pratap @ Badakku Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Shailendra Pratap Pankaj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

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