Gaya Prasad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2024)

Gaya Prasad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Applicant Gaya Prasad to be released on bail in FIR No. 202 of 2023 on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions: (a) execute a bond undertaking to attend hearings; (b) not commit any offence similar to that of which he is accused or suspected; and (c) 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 police officer, or tamper with the evidence.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant, Gaya Prasad, is entitled to be enlarged on bail in FIR No. 202 of 2023 under Section 377 IPC and Sections 5(m)/6 of the POCSO Act, in light of the medical evidence and the variance in the victim's statements.

Court's answer

Considering that the medical on record did not support the allegation, there was substantial variance between the two statements of the victim, and the material to corroborate the allegation of penetrative sexual assault as defined under Section 3 of the POCSO Act was apparently missing, the applicant — in custody since 02.08.2023 and with no criminal history — was entitled to be enlarged on bail.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted — Second bail application under Section 377 IPC and Sections 5(m)/6 POCSO Act (FIR No. 202 of 2023, P.S. Kursi, District Barabanki) allowed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench (Pankaj Bhatia, J.; Order Date 12.9.2024): medical examination of the victim aged about 10 years done on 01.08.2023 did not support the prosecution and showed no mark on the anal region; substantial variance existed between the victim's statements under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., the Section 164 statement specifically alleging penile insertion in the anal region; material corroborating penetrative sexual assault as defined under Section 3 of the POCSO Act was apparently missing; applicant in custody since 02.08.2023 with no criminal history — released on personal bond with two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each, with conditions to attend hearings, refrain from similar offences, and refrain from inducement, threat, promise or tampering with evidence. First bail application had been withdrawn on 19.06.2024 and the second bail application before the trial Court had been rejected.

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:63237

Court No. - 12

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9676 of 2024 Applicant :- Gaya Prasad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Kumar Gupta,Richa Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record. None has appeared for respondent no.2 despite notice.

2. This is the second bail application on behalf of the applicant seeking enlargement on bail in FIR No.202 of 2023, under Section 377 IPC & Section 5(m)/6 of POCSO Act, P.S. Kursi, District Barabanki.

3. The first bail application was withdrawn on 19.06.2024 with a liberty to pursue second bail before the trial Court which has now been rejected, as such, the present bail application has been filed.

4. In terms of the FIR registered on 31.07.2023 under Section 377 IPC read with Section 5m/6 of POCSO Act, it was alleged that son of the informant aged about 10 years had gone to the school and around 7 to 8 days ago, the applicant had allegedly inserted finger in the anal region of the child which was informed by the child after certain time, as such, the FIR was registered after some delay on 31.07.2023. In the statements under Section 161 & 164 Cr.P.C., the victim supported the prosecution, however, in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., it was specifically stated by the victim that it was a case for penile insertion in the anal region. The medical of the victim done on 01.08.2023 did not support the prosecution and no mark was seen on the anal region also.

5. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application.

6. Considering the medical on record not supporting the allegation and there being substantial variance in the two statements and the material to corroborate the allegation of penetrative sexual assault as defined under Section 3 of POCSO Act apparently being missing, the applicant who is in custody since 02.08.2023 and has no criminal history, is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed.

7. Let the applicant Gaya Prasad be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of 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 :- 12.9.2024

nishant

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