Allowed

Mohd. Aleem Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC21 Sept 2024BAIL/10063/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed the bail application of Mohd. Aleem Khan accused under IPC and POCSO. The court noted lack of corroboration in victim statements and medical reports before granting bail on bonds and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each under specified conditions.

Mohd. Aleem Khan vs State of U.P. Thru… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:65551

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10063 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Mohd. Aleem Khan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Pratap Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No. 77 of 2023 under Section 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act and Section 3 (2) V of the S.C./S.T. Act Police Station- Katka, District -Ambedkar Nagar.

¶8

3. In terms of the F.I.R., a missing person report was lodged alleging that grand daughter of the informant aged about 15 years was allegedly enticed by the applicant subsequently in the statement under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. the victim did not support the prosecution version and stated that they were in talking terms for the last 2 years and have gone along with the applicant to Mumbai. The tentative age of the victim was assessed as 15-16 years, however, normal procedure for determination of the age has not been followed so far. He lastly argues that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and he is in jail since 8.11.2023.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposes the bail application.

¶10

Considering the aforesaid two statements does not corroborate with the allegation made against the applicant and medical report on record also does not corroborate any allegation of wrong being done on the victim, the applicant is enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶11

6. Let the applicant Mohd. Aleem Khan be released on bail in the abovesaid first information report number 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:

¶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 offences 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 :- 21.9.2024 Anuj Singh

¶16

Digitally signed by :- ANUJ PRATAP SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd. Aleem Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Aleem Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Radheshyam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Pappu Singh @ Randeep Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Rajesh Gond @ Rajesh Ramsunder Gond Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Bitul vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Panchayatiraj Lko and 2 Others

Madhubala Bhargava vs Sri Abhishek Kumar Tiwari

Sushama vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko