Allowed

Arvind v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Secrt. Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC12 Mar 2024BAIL/2718/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under Sections 377 IPC and 5M/6 POCSO Act for alleged rape of a mentally retarded minor. Court noted absence of injuries in medical examination, victim's statements under Sections 161 and 164 CrPC, incarceration since July 2023 with no criminal history, and allowed bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties with conditions imposed in the interest of justice.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:45234

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2718 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Arvind Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Secrt. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Asarey Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State.

¶7

As per the instructions of learned AGA, the complainant is served, still, no one has appeared on behalf of the complainant.

¶8

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that on 01.07.2023 at about 12 'O clock, son of the informant Awadhesh aged about 12 years went away from home somewhere. At about 4:00 pm on the chak marg of Pankaj Kapoor, the applicant allegedly was committing rape upon the victim and upon seeing the informant, he left the victim and ran away. The victim is mentally retarded to told her mother about the entire incident by using signs.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent; no mark of any injury has been found in the medical examination of the victim. No injury has been found during the anal examination of the victim. He has been falsely implicated. The applicant is languishing in jail since 05.07.2023 without having any criminal history.

¶10

It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

On due consideration to the statements of the victim recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C.; lack of corroborative medical evidence; period of incarceration undergone by the applicant, coupled with the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 05.07.2023 without having any criminal history and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶13

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant, Arvind, involved in Case Crime/FIR No. 467/2023, under Sections 377 IPC and Section 5M/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station - Dhaurahra, District - Lakhimpur Kheri, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶15

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶16

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶17

(iii) 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.

¶18

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶19

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal

¶20

Code.

¶21

(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶22

Order Date :- 3.7.2024 R.C.

¶23

Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Arvind v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Secrt. Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arvind v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Secrt. 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

Mohd. Suhail vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Israil Khan and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. U.P. Lko. and Another

Rajnish vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Deepankar Lahari vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow and Another

Virendra Pandey and 23 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Horticulture/Food Processing Lko. and 2 Others

Tabasheer Hasan @ Sagar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another