Allowed

Rajesh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 3 Others

Allahabad HC30 Jan 2024/989/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC, POCSO and SC/ST Act based on a missing person FIR. The victim's statements did not support the prosecution story and no definite age proof existed under the Juvenile Justice Act; the court allowed bail.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each, subject to standard conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:8334

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 989 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Rajesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Kumar Misra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

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

¶7

2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.0053 of 2023, under Section 363, 366, 376 IPC, Section 3/4 of POCSO Act & Section 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act, P.S. Beeghapur, District Unnao.

¶8

3. In terms of the FIR, a missing person report was lodged alleging that the applicant had enticed away the daughter of the informant. Subsequently, in the statement under Section 161 & 164 Cr.P.C., the victim did not support the prosecution story and stated that she had gone out of her own freewill and they had also stayed together for 2 to 3 months. There is no definite document with regard to the age of the victim as per the provisions of the Juvenile Justice Act and the Rules framed thereunder.

¶9

4. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application.

¶10

5. Considering the two statements, the applicant who is in custody since 22.07.2023 and has one criminal history of a minor offence under Section 323, 504, 506, 452 IPC, is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed.

¶11

6. Let the applicant Rajesh be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions:

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

(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.

¶15

Order Date :- 30.1.2024 nishant

¶16

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

Rajesh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. 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

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

Azad Bahadur Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Ram Babu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Chhotkau Alias Wasim Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Saurabh Singh Vs State of U.P.

Khajanchi @ Khajanti Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.