Allowed

Chhote Lal Lodhi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC5 Jan 2024/57/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was allowed considering the STF reliance on Deepak Gulati, the significant delay in filing the FIR, the applicant's lack of criminal history, and the view that his release would not adversely affect the trial.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail under personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.25,000/- each.

Chhote Lal Lodhi Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:1504

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 57 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Chhote Lal Lodhi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Imaran,Mohd. Vakar Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

1 . Supplementary afÏdavit filed today is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record. None turned up on behalf of the informant despite notice.

¶8

3 . In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that the informant used to study in the school when the applicant used to misbehave with her and on 23.09.2023 the applicant had administered some intoxicated substance and thereafter took her to a brick-klin and thereafter made physical relation with the victim, as a result thereof, a fetus of four months was being carried by the victim and now, the applicant was refused to marry her. The FIR was lodged on 18.08.2023 after about 11 months of the alleged first incident.

¶9

4 . The submission of the counsel for the applicant is that even in the statement under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. it was stated that the applicant had formed physical relation on the false promise of marriage, he places reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the Case of Deepak Gulati Versus of State of Haraya, AIR 2013 SC 2071.

¶10

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

¶11

6. Considering the law as explained in the Deepak Gulati (Supra) coupled with the fact that the FIR was lodged after a delay of 11 months, the applicant has no criminal history and is in custody since 20.08.2023 and there is nothing on record to demonstrate that the applicant if enlarged on bail, would in any way adversely affect the trial and without expressing any opinion on merit, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶12

7. Let the applicant Chhote Lal Lodhi be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.476 of 2023, under Sections 363, 366, 341, 376, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Gurubuxganj, District Raebareli, on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.25,000/- 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 :- 5.1.2024 Arun

¶17

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

Chhote Lal Lodhi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chhote Lal Lodhi v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. 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

Islam @ Munna Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Ram Bhajan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko.

Akash Rawat Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Others

Hajari Kuldeep Alias Hajari Kureel Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Govt. U.P. Lucknow and 3 Others

Shivam Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko

Vikram Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko