Monish Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and 3 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:6874

Court No. - 14

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6313 of 2023 Applicant :- Monish Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. And 3 Others

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Zia Ul Qayuim,Ajeet Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Devendra Pratap,Shashank Shekhar Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. None appears on behalf of the complainant.

¶7

It is alleged in the FIR that on 18.10.2022 at 6:00 pm while the minor daughter of the informant went to take medicine from the medical store situated near the bridge of Golhupur and did not return till late in evening, the informant went for searching her daughter near the medical store. The shops were closed. She informed about the incident to her husband who was in Punjab. Her husband came from Punjab and they tried their best regarding searching their daughter, however, they could not find her and thereafter lodged the FIR at the police station.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that it is a case of false implication. The mother of the victim (informant) while giving statement before the Court as PW-1 has not supported the prosecution case. Likewise, PW-2 victim has also not supported the prosecution case. There is no corroborative evidence in the medical report. As per the ossification test, she was 17 years old at the time of incident.

¶9

It is further submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 30.10.2022 without having any criminal antecedent. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

On due consideration to the statements of PW-1 and PW-2 as well as considering the fact that there is no possibility of tampering the evidence as the fact witnesses have been examined, so also considering the fact that applicant is

¶12

languishing in jail since 30.10.2022 without having any criminal antecedent and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶13

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant, Monish, involved in Case Crime/FIR No. 486/2022, under Sections 363/366/376 IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station - Bangarmau, District - Unnao, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶15

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶16

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶17

(iii) 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 officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

(iv) 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.

¶19

(v) 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.

¶20

(vi) 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 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

Order Date :- 23.1.2024/R.C.

¶22

Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Monish v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Monish v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chaman Prakash Kashyap vs State, through S.P. C.B.I. /Acb/Lucknow

Sadda @ Bhallu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Sushil Kumar Pno. No. 030530368 vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Isahak Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, U.P. Lucknow

Naiem @ Motu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko.

Jabbar and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt.