Allowed

Rakesh Kumar Chaube v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC30 Sept 2024/5525/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Applicant along with others was accused of enticement and sexual assault on a minor. Bail application allowed with conditions due to substantial FIR delay and lack of medical injury corroboration.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bonds and two sureties of Rs.20,000 each on conditions to attend hearings and not interfere with investigation.

Rakesh Kumar Chaube Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:67592

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5525 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Chaube Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Dilip Kumar Chaudhary,Dinesh Kr. Chaudhary,Durgesh Kumar Pathak,Sulabh Kr. Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dinesh Kumar Shukla

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

Heard Shri Durgesh Kumar Pathak, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶7

None appears on behalf of the respondent no.2.

¶8

In terms of the F.I.R., it was alleged that daughter of the informant aged about 16 years was enticed away by the three accused including the applicant on 13.9.2022. The F.I.R. was lodged on 17.9.2022. No allegation of any wrong was alleged in the said F.I.R. Subsequently, in the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the victim stated that on 13.9.2022, she had left home when the applicant with an intent to marry her alongwith other two accused enticed her and took her to his home and from there to Barabanki where she was kept in room and wrong was also committed on her and on 17.9.2022, the applicant had dropped her back. In the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the victim stated that the applicant was the son of his real uncle and her cousin brother. She stated that on the stating of the said three persons, she had gone with with where she was confined at his home and the applicant had committed wrong on her.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn my attention to the medical on record does not indicate any injury to suggest any sexual assault. The tentative age of the victim as per the F.I.R. is 16 years and as per the statement of the father contained in Annexure No.6, she is aged about 19 years. In any case, it is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in custody

¶10

since 2.11.2022 and till date out of the total 14 witnesses, only four witnesses have been examined. The testimony of the victim has already been recorded. There is susbstantial delay in lodging the F.I.R. Hence, the applicant who is having criminal history of one case which has been duly explained in the supplementary afÏdavit filed on behalf of the applicant dated 29.8.2023, may be enlarged on bail.

¶11

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

¶12

Considering the aforesaid facts particularly the fact that the medical on record does not corroborate the allegations levelled in the F.I.R. and there being substantial delay in lodging the F.I.R. coupled with the fact that once the statement of the victim has been recorded, there is no material on record to suggest that if the applicant is enlarged on bail, he can affect the trial in any manner and the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 2.11.2022 having criminal history of one case which has been duly explained in the supplementary afÏdavit filed on behalf of the applicant dated 29.8.2023, without expressing any opinion on merit, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶13

Accordingly, the application for grant of bail is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant Rakesh Kumar Chaube be released on bail in FIR/ Crime No.373 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376, 342 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act, Police Station Itiyathok, District Gonda 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 :-

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

¶18

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.

¶19

Order Date :- 30.9.2024

¶20

Shukla

¶21

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

Rakesh Kumar Chaube v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Kumar Chaube v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Naman Alias Bauwa Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

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

Amit Raj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko.

Anubhav Singh @ Golu Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Ministry Home Affairs Govt. Sectt. Lko

Amit Mishra vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Others

Sujeet @ Sherkhan vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Lucknow