Allowed

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

Allahabad HC8 Jan 2024BAIL/164/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a bail petition challenging charges of abduction and sexual offences. The court found the prosecution story suspect due to medical evidence indicating the victim's pregnancy date preceded the alleged incident by nearly two months, creating an inherent contradiction.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with personal bonds and two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each under specific conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:1797

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 164 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Rohit Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Priyam Kumar Singh 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

The F.I.R. in question was lodged as missing person report. Subsequently, in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the victim has stated that on 4.6.2023, she had gone to ease herself. Then the applicant took her by force and took her to Punjab and thereafter to Rajasthan and thereafter she was taken to one another place which she did not remember and after the case was registered, the applicant dropped her back. In the medico legal examination, no mark of injury was found on the body of the victim. In the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the victim supported the prosecution story.

¶8

In the light of the said, learned counsel for the applicant argues that as per the medical report on record, conducted on 22.6.2023, a fetus of eight weeks and four days was detected, as such the entire story becomes false as the initial allegation was levelled with regard to the offence committed on 4.6.2023. The medical otherwise also does not record any use of force or injury. The applicant has no criminal antecedents and is in jail since 28.6.2023, hence, the applicant may be granted bail.

¶9

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

¶10

Considering the fact that the incident was alleged on 4.6.2023 and on 22.6.2023, the medical

¶11

report indicates pregnancy of eight weeks and four days, prima facie the allegation against the applicant are not trustworthy and the credibility of the prosecution story has become suspect, the age of the victim is around 18 years and the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is in custody since 28.6.2023 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 Rohit Kumar be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.199 of 2023, under Sections 363, 366, 504, 506, 376 I.P.C., Police Station Tambaur, District Sitapur 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 :-

¶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 :- 8.1.2024

¶18

Shukla

¶19

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

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.