Allowed

Amit Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. of U.P. Lucknow and Others

Allahabad HC13 Feb 2024BAIL/1608/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application by a man accused of rape under IPC and POCSO sections after physical relations formed over a year on false pretext of marriage. Court relied on Supreme Court precedent, noted no criminal antecedents and custody since 2023, allowed bail with conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail in FIR/Case Crime No.246 of 2023 on personal bond and two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each, with conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:28527

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1608 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Amit Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Of U.P. Lucknow And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Awasthi,Anand Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashish Raman Mishra

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Arun Kumar Mishra, Advocate holding brief of Shri Ashish Raman Mishra, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶7

In terms of the F.I.R., it was alleged that the informant had met the applicant had become friendly to him and thereafter on the false pretext of marriage, on various occasions, physical relations were formed between them.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn my attention to the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. wherein she stated the same as has been narrated in the F.I.R. In her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the victim admitted that she knew the applicant for the last one year and physical relations were formed with him, although without the consent of the victim. There is no definite document with regard to the determination of the age of the victim as prescribed under Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice Act and the same shall be decided at the time of the trial.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Deepak Gulati Vs. State of Haryana : AIR 2013 SC 2071 to argue that admittedly physical relations continued in between the parties over a span of one year, as such no case can be said to be made out against the applicant. The applicant is in custody since 6.6.2023 having no criminal antecedents, hence the applicant may be released on bail.

¶10

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

¶11

Considering the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Deepak Gulati Vs. State of Haryana(supra) coupled with the fact that the relationship admittedly continued over a period of one year on a false pretext of marriage and the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is languishing in jail since 6.6.2023 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.

¶12

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant Amit Kumar be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.246 of 2023, under Sections 376(3), 323, 504, 506, 452 I.P.C. and Section 5J(ii)/6 of the POCSO Act, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Bahraich 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 :-

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

(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.

¶17

Order Date :- 8.4.2024

¶18

Shukla

¶19

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

Amit Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. of U.P. Lucknow and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amit Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. of U.P. Lucknow and Others

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

Mohd. Nadeem Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Lucknow

Piyush Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko

Irshad @ Chikna Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. (Home), U.P. Lucknow

Gaurav Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home, Lko.

Ram Sukh Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko.

Srikeshan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko.