Allowed

Aditya Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC21 Mar 2024/7878/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed the bail application of Aditya Yadav, a first-time offender accused of sexual offences, noting the delay in FIR registration and the complainant's refusal to undergo medical examination. The applicant was released on personal bonds and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bonds and two sureties of Rs. 20,000/- each.

Aditya Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:25462

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7878 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Aditya Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Bhanu Singh,Nivedita Srivastava,Sandeep Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Jaikaran,Saurabh Srivastava

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Saurabh Srivastava, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶7

In terms of the F.I.R., it was alleged that around five years ago when the informant used to go to school, the applicant used to tease her and threatened her and physical relations were also formed against her consent. It was also alleged that inappropriate videos were also made and threat has been extended that he would not allow the marriage of the informant with anyone else and if so does, he will made the video viral. Subsequently, under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. similar statements were given.

¶8

It is argued by counsel for the applicant that the victim has refused to undergo medical examination. Considering the fact that even as per the admission, the incident is of three years ago and there is no explanation of the inordinate delay in lodging the F.I.R. He further argued that the applicant has no criminal history and is in custody since 20.04.2023, as such, he may be enlarged on bail.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail prayer.

¶10

Considering the facts stated above and coupled with the fact that applicant has continued in detention since 20.04.2023 and has no criminal history, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant- Aditya Yadav be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.36 of 2023, under Sections 376, 506 IPC, Police Station Dalmau District Raebareli on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court

¶12

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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

Order Date :- 21.3.2024

¶17

Saurabh Yadav/-

¶18

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

Aditya Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aditya Yadav v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 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

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

Ashish Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Civil Secrett. Lko.

Rohit Sahu @ Rohit Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Safi Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Kamlesh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko

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