Allowed

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

Allahabad HC5 Jan 2024BAIL/32/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed bail to Ramkaran in a criminal case involving alleged sexual misconduct against a minor. The order relied on an inordinate six-day FIR delay, lack of medical evidence supporting injuries, and independent witness statements contradicting the prosecution.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Ramkaran released on bail on personal bonds and two sureties of Rs. 25,000 each with standard conditions.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:36154

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 32 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ramkaran Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Alok Kumar Mishra,Avnish Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Shri Shani Pratap Singh, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶7

No one appears for the respondent no.2 despite service of notice.

¶8

Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent State is taken on record.

¶9

In terms of the F.I.R. lodged on 3.9.2023, it was alleged that the daughter of the informant aged about 12 years was working in agricultural fields on 28.8.2023 when the applicant committed wrong on her. It was also stated that the victim was shouting, however the applicant committed the offence on her. The statements under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. are on record wherein the victim stated and gave an impression that wrong was done on her.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn my attention to the medical report on record including the radiological examination where the age of the victim was assessed at around 15 years. The medical report with respect to internal examination done on 4.9.2023 does not indicate any injury present on the external or internal part of the victim. He further drawn my attention to the statement of the independent witnesses who stated that on account of payment with regard to certain crops, there existed an enmity in between the family of the informant and the applicant. The

¶11

independent witness has also stated that on the said date, he has seen both the daughters of the informant present on the spot including the elder sister of the victim.

¶12

In the light of the said, it is argued that it is a case of false prosecution not supported by the medical on record.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. however opposed the prayer for bail by arguing that the age of the victim is less than 18 years and considering the gravity of the allegations, the bail application should be rejected.

¶14

What transpires from the record that there is a substantial delay of around six days in lodging the F.I.R. without there being any explanation; the statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. corroborate the F.I.R. allegation, however, the medical on record does not corroborate the same.

¶15

Considering the statements of the independent witnesses coupled with the fact that there is inordinate delay in lodging the F.I.R. without there being any explanation, the applicant who is in custody since 7.9.2023 having no criminal history 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.

¶16

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶17

Let the applicant Ramkaran be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.0510 of 2023, under Section 376(3), 506, 323 I.P.C. and Section 5-Ta/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Pihani, District Hardoi 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 :-

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

(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.

¶21

Order Date :- 10.5.2024

¶22

Shukla

¶23

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramkaran v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home 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

Islam @ Munna Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko

Ram Bhajan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko.

Akash Rawat Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Others

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