Allowed

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

Allahabad HC3 Apr 2024BAIL/3513/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application in a POCSO and rape case where the FIR was filed about two months after the alleged incident, the medical report did not corroborate the allegations, the victim's statements lacked details, no formal age determination had occurred, and the accused had no criminal antecedents and was in custody since 20.11.2023.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Vikas to be released on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each with conditions to attend hearings, not commit similar offences, and not tamper with evidence o

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:28649

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3513 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Vikas Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ajeet Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record. None has appeared for respondent no.2 despite notice.

¶7

2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.472 of 2023, under Section 376(3), 452, 506, 120B IPC, Section 67 of Information Technology Act & Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, P.S. Lonar, District Hardoi.

¶8

3. In terms of the FIR it was alleged that the sister of the informant aged about 15 years used to stay alone at home and the applicant used to stay in the same neighbourhood and around two months ago, the applicant had called the sister of the informant through one Sneha and after administering some noxious substance, rape was committed on her and a video was also made. It was also stated that for two months continuously physical relations were formed. Subsequently, it was alleged that the video was made viral and then the sister of the informant had informed about the offence in question.

¶9

4. In the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the victim stated that around three months ago, her friend Sneha called her home and her mother had given some sweets ( Laddoo ) to her after eating which she became unconscious and when she gained consciousness, she saw the applicant alongwith her and then she felt that something wrong had happened to her. It was also stated that she was informed by the applicant that some video has been made. In the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the victim again stated that the incident had happened around two months ago when the mother of her friend given some sweets ( Laddoo ) to eat which resulted in her becoming unconscious. It was specifically alleged that wrong was committed on her by the applicant and she was also bleeding.

¶10

5. In the light of the said allegation, learned counsel for the applicant argues that the medical report on record naturally does not corroborate any of the allegations as the FIR itself was lodged after two months of the alleged incident. He further

¶11

argues that the two statements are lacking in details with regard to time and place of the incident over a span of two months. The tentative age of the victim is assessed at 14 to 15 years, however, no formal process of age determination has taken place. It is further argued that even the video allegedly referred to has not been supplied to the Investigating Officer in terms of the report of the Investigating Officer which is on record.

¶12

6. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application by arguing that the tentative age of the victim is around 15 years and thus, the bail application should be rejected.

¶13

7. Considering the submissions made at the Bar, it is clear that the FIR in question was lodged after about two months of the alleged incident and apart from the statements under Section 161 & 164 Cr.P.C., there is no material to corroborate the allegation, especially the medical which does not corroborate any of the allegations. In view of the said facts coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is in custody since 20.11.2023, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed.

¶14

8. Let the applicant Vikas be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions:

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

(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.

¶18

Order Date :- 9.4.2024 nishant

¶19

Digitally signed by :- NISHANT MOHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

Sarju Chauhan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Dular Chand Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Kanti Devi @ Shanti Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Kamlesh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko

Santosh Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P., Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Rajkumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.