Allowed

Suraj Pal Alias Putti Lal Pal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC23 Aug 2024/7487/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court allowed a bail application in a criminal case involving offences under the IPC and POCSO Act. The court relied on the victim's statement denying the prosecution story and an applicant's undertaking to register the marriage within three months.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties of Rs. 20,000 each, subject to conditions including registering the marriage.

Suraj Pal Alias Putti Lal Pal Vs State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:57787

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7487 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Suraj Pal Alias Putti Lal Pal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Aman Kumar Shrivastav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶7

Counter Affidavit filed in court is taken on record.

¶8

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

¶9

This is second application for bail seeking enlargement in Case Crime No.152 of 2023 under sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and section 3/4 POCSO Act and section 3(2)5, 3(2)5KA SC/ST Act, P.S. Manikpur, District Pratapgarh, the first bail application of the applicant was dismissed as not pressed by this court vide order dated 25.06.2024. .

¶10

While arguing the second bail application, it is argued that the FIR in question was registered as a missing person report alleging that the daughter of the informant went missing from 12.05.2023. Subsequently, in the statement under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., the victim did not support the prosecution story and stated that she had married the applicant with whom she was having affair since three years. The tentative age of the victim is around eighteen years.

¶11

Considering the two statements not supporting the prosecution coupled with the undertaking of the applicant that he would get the marriage registered within three months of being released from jail subject to the consent of the victim, as such, he is entitled for the bail. Thus the bail application is allowed.

¶12

Let the applicant Suraj Pal Alias Putti Lal Pal be released on bail in aforesaid first information report number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) each of the like amount 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 officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

In case the applicant resiles from his undertaking of getting the marriage registered despite the consent of the victim, the victim would be at liberty to move the bail cancellation application.

¶17

Order Date :- 23.8.2024 VNP/-

¶18

Digitally signed by :- VISHVANATH PRASAD SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Suraj Pal Alias Putti Lal Pal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suraj Pal Alias Putti Lal Pal 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sana Ullah Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Surjeet Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Chotu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Ritesh Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Rafiullah Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Riyajul Hasan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.