Allowed

Santu Ghorai and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Secrt. Lko. and Others

Allahabad HC5 Mar 2024BAIL/2522/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, Lucknow Bench, allowed a bail application filed by Santu Ghorai and Pintu Ghorai, who were accused of enticing a minor. Based on conflicting victim statements and prolonged detention since 2020, the Court held that Article 21 rights were violated and granted bail on personal and surety bonds.

What did the court decide?

Applicants Santu Ghorai and Pintu Ghorai released on bail with personal bonds and two sureties of Rs.10,000/- each under Sections 363, 366, 381, 411, 376 IPC and POCSO Act.

Santu Ghorai and Another vs State of U.P… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:54796

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2522 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Santu Ghorai And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. The Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Secrt. Lko. And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Bahadur Singh Rawat,Suman Kanoujia

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dr.Surendra Singh Chauhan,Vinay Kumar Singh

¶6

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Surendra Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶8

2 . In terms of the FIR a missing person report was lodged alleging that the daughter of the informant was missing and was enticed by the applicants. It was also stated that she had taken along with her substantial jewellery, subsequently in the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the victim stated that she knew the applicants for the last six months and they had physical relations also and both of them had decided to go their home and as such, the victim took the jewellery and went to Alambagh to Kolkata and marriage was also performed. A somewhat similar statement was given under Section 164 Cr.P.C.. He further argued that there is no definite document on record with regard to the exact age of the victim as the birth certificate relied upon by the prosecution depicting the date of birth as 27.08.2017 was itself issued in the year 2017, which itself makes it suspect in any case relies upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Monish Vs. State of U.P. passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 55026 of 2021 decided on 09.02.2023 , to argue the

¶9

exact determination of age, which shall be done at the time of trial.

¶10

3. Learned A.G.A. as well as the counsel for the complainant opposed the bail prayer.

¶11

4. Considering the two statements of the victim not supporting the prosecution and finding that that applicants are in custody since 15.12.2020, prima facie, a view can be formed that on account of prolong pre trial detention, their rights enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India stand violated, as such, the applicants who have no criminal history, are enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶12

5. Let the applicants Santu Ghorai & Pintu Ghorai be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No. 416 of 2020, under Sections 363, 366, 381, 411, 376 IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Chowk, District Lucknow, on their furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.10,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶13

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

¶14

(b) The applicants shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which they are accused or suspected of the commission; and

¶15

(c) The applicants 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

Order Date :- 8.8.2024 Arun

¶17

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

Santu Ghorai and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Secrt. Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santu Ghorai and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Secrt. Lko. 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Karan Pasi vs State of U.P. through Secretary Home Department Civil Secretariat, Lucknow

Dipu vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Mohd. Arshad vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and 3 Others

Kanhaiya Lal vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy., Revenue Deptt., Lucknow and Others

Bheem Sen vs Bano and 2 Others

Sanjay Dwivedi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Civil Secrt. Lko. and Others