Allowed

Sunil Sharma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko.

Allahabad HC8 Jan 2024BAIL/126/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a bail application by the applicant, Sunil Sharma, under IPC Sections 376 and 506. Relying on the Supreme Court decision in Deepak Gulati, the court observed that physical relations continued for four years, viewing the accusation as unlikely to be correct. The applicant was released on personal bonds and surety.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bonds and two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each under IPC Sections 376 and 506.

Sunil Sharma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:1823

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 126 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Sunil Sharma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Bajpai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶7

2 . In terms of the F.I.R., it was alleged that the informant had met the applicant through an App and on the false pretext of marriage, physical relations were formed. The incident is said to be occurred on 10.01.2022 and the F.I.R. in question was lodged on 27.09.2023.

¶8

3 . The counsel for the applicant draws my attention to the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P., wherein it was stated that the victim was having physical relations with the applicant for the last four years. In short, the allegation is that on the false pretext of marriage, physical relations were formed, even the medical examination was refused by the informant. Reliance is placed upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in the Case of Deepak Gulati Versus of State of Haryana, AIR 2013 SC 2071.

¶9

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

¶10

5. Considering the statements that the relations continued over a span of four years, in view of the law as explained in the case of Deepak Gulathi Vs. State of Haryana (Supra) coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedent

¶11

and is in custody since 23.11.2023 and there is nothing on record to demonstrate that the applicant if enlarged on bail, would in any way adversely affect the trial and without expressing any opinion on merit, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶12

6. Let the applicant Sunil Sharma be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No. 341 of 2023, under Sections 376, 506 IPC, Police Station Dargah Sharif, District Bahraich, on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

Order Date :- 8.1.2024 Arun

¶17

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

Sunil Sharma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sunil Sharma v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Chhote Lal Lodhi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Hajari Kuldeep Alias Hajari Kureel Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Govt. U.P. Lucknow and 3 Others

Shivam Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko

Irshad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lucknow and 4 Others

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

Rohit Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.