Sachin Sonkar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Sachin Sonkar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Applicant Sachin Sonkar to be released on bail in FIR/Case Crime No. 106 of 2024, under Sections 452, 354(D), 376, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Raebareli, on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions (a) undertaking to attend hearings, (b) not committing any similar offence, and (c) not making any inducement, threat or promise to dissuade disclosure of facts or tamper with evidence.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, Sachin Sonkar, in custody since 9.4.2024 in FIR/Case Crime No. 106 of 2024 (Sections 452, 354(D), 376, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Raebareli), is entitled to be released on bail.

Court's answer

The applicant is entitled to be released on bail: the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is not corroborated by any medical evidence on record, the victim has refused to undergo medical examination and is 28 years old, the applicant is in custody since 9.4.2024 with no criminal antecedents, and there is nothing on record to demonstrate that the applicant if enlarged on bail would adversely affect the trial; the court expressly refrained from expressing any opinion on merits.

Ratio / Principle

The bail application is allowed; the applicant Sachin Sonkar is to be released on bail in FIR/Case Crime No. 106 of 2024 on furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the conditions in clauses (a) to (c): undertaking to attend hearings, not committing any similar offence, and not making any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts so as to dissuade disclosure or tamper with the evidence.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail - grant of - Offences punishable under Sections 452, 354(D), 376, 506 I.P.C. (F.I.R. initially under Sections 452 and 354(Gha) I.P.C.), Case Crime No. 106 of 2024, Police Station Kotwali, District Raebareli - Victim's statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. not corroborated by any medical evidence on record; victim (aged 28 years) refused to undergo medical examination; applicant in custody since 9.4.2024 with no criminal antecedents; nothing on record to show that enlargement on bail would adversely affect the trial - Bail application allowed without expressing any opinion on merits; applicant to be released on personal bond and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each, subject to conditions of attending hearings, abstaining from similar offences, and not inducing, threatening or tampering with evidence. (Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, Pankaj Bhatia, J.; Order dated 9.7.2024; Neutral Citation 2024:AHC-LKO:46642)

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:46642

Court No. - 12

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6525 of 2024

Applicant :- Sachin Sonkar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Dixit Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vimal Kishor Singh

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Pramod Kant, Advocate holding brief of Shri Vimal Kishor Singh, learned counsel for the respondent complainant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

Counter afÏdavits filed on behalf of the respondent complainant as well as learned A.G.A. are taken on record.

In terms of the F.I.R. initially lodged under Sections 452 and 354(Gha) I.P.C., it was alleged that the applicant used to express his love for the victim and was trying to harass her at times. On 4.2.2024, he caught hold her hands and insisted her to marry.

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that as per the the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the victim specifically stated that apart from harassment, no other thing was done to her. However, in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she alleged that on 4.2.2024, the applicant committed wrong on her. The age of the victim is 28 years. The victim has refused to undergo medical examination. The Whattsapp chats in between the applicant and the victim demonstrates their proximity. The applicant is in jail since 9.4.2024 having no criminal history, hence the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

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

Considering the fact that the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is not corroborated by any

medical evidence on record and the fact that the victim has refused to undergo medical examination and the fact that the victim is 28 years coupled with the fact that the applicant is in custody since 9.4.2024 having no criminal antecedents 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.

Let the applicant Sachin Sonkar be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.106 of 2024, under Sections 452, 354(D), 376, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Raebareli 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 :-

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

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

(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.

Order Date :- 9.7.2024

Shukla

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