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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Applicant Mohd. Ishrail to be released on bail in FIR No.93 of 2024 on furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions: (a) bond to attend hearings; (b) not to commit any similar offence; (c) not to induce, threaten or promise any person acquainted with the facts so as to dissuade disclosure or tamper with evidence.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Mohd. Ishrail is entitled to be released on bail in Session Case No.1360 of 2024 (arising out of FIR No.93 of 2024) under Section 376AB IPC and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act.

Court's answer

Considering the statements in the FIR and under Sections 161/164 Cr.P.C., the submission that there was no allegation of penetrative sexual assault as defined under Section 3 of POCSO Act and Section 375 of IPC, the victim's refusal to undergo medical examination, the rent dispute between the parties, the applicant's lack of criminal antecedents and incarceration since 27.02.2024, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail allowed under Section 376AB IPC and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act (Session Case No.1360 of 2024, arising out of FIR No.93 of 2024, P.S. Thakurganj, District Lucknow). The FIR was originally registered under Sections 354A, 354B IPC and Section 7/8 of POCSO Act with no allegation of rape; in her Section 161 Cr.P.C. statement the victim alleged the applicant tried to remove her clothes and kissed her neck, and in her Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement she alleged he kissed her private parts. Granting bail, the Court relied on the absence of any allegation of penetrative sexual assault as defined under Section 3 of POCSO Act and Section 375 of IPC, the victim's refusal to undergo medical examination, a rent dispute between the parties, the applicant's clean antecedents and custody since 27.02.2024. Release ordered on personal bond and two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each, with conditions to attend hearings, refrain from similar offences, and not tamper with evidence or influence witnesses.

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:60907

Court No. - 12

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9353 of 2024

Applicant :- Mohd. Ishrail Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Satendra Kumar Verma,Abhishek Srivastava

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record. Despite service of notice, no one appeared on behalf of the complainant.

2 . The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in Session Case No.1360 of 2024 arising out of FIR No.93 of 2024, under Section 376AB IPC and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Thakurganj, District Lucknow.

3 . In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that the daughter of the informant aged about 8 years was misbehaved with by the applicant, who was neighbour. It was also alleged that he had inappropriately touched her. No allegation of rape was levelled in the FIR, which was registered under Sections 354A, 354B IPC and Section 7/8 of POCSO Act. In the statement under Section 161 of Cr.P.C., the victim stated that the applicant had tried to remove her cloths and kissed her on neck. No allegation of rape was levlled. In the statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., the victim stated that the applicant had kissed her private parts.

4 . Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the bail prayer.

5. Considering all these statements; the submission of the Counsel for the applicant that there were no allegation of penetrative sexual assault as defined under Section 3 of POCSO Act and under Section 375 of IPC; the victim refused to undergo medical examination; the documents on record also demonstrates that there was a dispute in between them with regard to payment of rent coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is languishing in jail since 27.02.2024, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is

allowed .

6. Let the applicant Mohd. Ishrail be released on bail in the aforesaid first information report 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 officer or tamper with the evidence.

Order Date :- 4.9.2024 akverma

Digitally signed by :- ASHOK KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench