Allowed

Rajendra Mangta v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Allahabad HC31 Jul 2024/6913/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application in an FIR involving rape and offence against a child was allowed. The Allahabad High Court, relying on the fact that the victim resiled from her statement and failed to support the prosecution story, granted bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Accused enlarged on bail in FIR No. 697 of 2019 on personal bond with one surety of Rs. 5,000/- each.

Rajendra Mangta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:52327

¶2

Court No. - 12 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6913 of 2024 Applicant :- Rajendra Mangta Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Puneet Kumar Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶4

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.

¶5

2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.697 of 2019, under Section 376 IPC & Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, P.S. Gosainganj, District Lucknow.

¶6

3. The FIR in question was lodged by the victim alleging that the applicant, who is father of the victim, used to physically exploit her. Subsequently, the victim resiled from her statement made under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and stated that the statement was given on account of fear. In short, she has not supported the prosecution story. The said statement of the victim recorded during trial is on record as Annexure - 5.

¶7

4. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application.

¶8

5. Considering the said statement where the victim has not supported the prosecution story, the applicant, who is in custody since 17.09.2019 and has no criminal history, is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed.

¶9

6. Let the applicant Rajendra Mangta be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with one surety of Rs.5,000/- each to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions:

¶10

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

¶11

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

¶12

(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 officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶13

Order Date :- 31.7.2024 nishant

¶14

Digitally signed by :- NISHANT MOHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rajendra Mangta v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Mangta v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

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

Rekha Devi Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko.

Kamlesh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Ram Prakash Pathak Alias Lal Maharaj Tantrik Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, U.P. Lko.

Monu @ Mukaddar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow and 3 Others

Saroj Kumar Verma @ Chhotu Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Ors.