Allowed

Arjun Chaurasiya v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Allahabad HC19 Jul 2024/5916/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The bail application was allowed to Arjun Chaurasiya, who had been in custody since 15.05.2022 without a prior criminal record. The court granted bail based on the statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. indicating consent, coupled with the substantial period of pre-trial detention. He was released to execute bond with two sureties of Rs. 20,000 each.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail with execution of personal bond and two sureties of Rs. 20,000 each, subject to standard conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:48847

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5916 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Arjun Chaurasiya Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Priyanka Yadav,Neelima Sharma,Pankaj Kumar Tiwari,Vinod Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶7

Heard Ms. Priyanka Yadav and Ms. Shabnam Sheikh, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶8

2 . In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that on 14.05.2022 when the daughter of the informant had gone for answering the nature's call, the applicant, who was sitting there, committed wrong on her.

¶9

3 . In the light of the said, the counsel for the applicant draws my attention to the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., which reveals that on the said date, the applicant continued, to perform the physical relations, details were also mentioned in the said statement, which according to the applicant indicate the consent. The counsel for the applicant also draws my attention to the statement of the witness, who had allegedly seen the applicant and the victim, entering into physical relations to argue that it was a case of consensual act. The tentative age of the victim is around 20 years.

¶10

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

¶11

5. Considering all these facts coupled with the fact that the applicant is in custody since 15.05.2022 and has suffered pre trial detention of more then

¶12

two years, the applicant who has no criminal history is enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶13

6. Let the applicant Arjun Chaurasiya be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No. 149 of 2022, under Sections 376, 506, 352 IPC, Police Station Banthara, District Lucknow, 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:

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

(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.

¶17

Order Date :- 19.7.2024 Arun

¶18

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

Arjun Chaurasiya v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arjun Chaurasiya v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. 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

Similar cases

Suraj Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Smt. Rajrani Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Anil Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Kallu Alias Javed Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Lateeq @ Laheek Vs State of U.P. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Sonu Nat Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow and 3 Others