Allowed

Rakesh Kumar @ Kallu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC16 Apr 2024BAIL/3932/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court held a bail application of an applicant accused of sexual assault on a minor. Considering doubt on victim credibility and age, and citing Monish case law, the court granted bail with bonds and sureties.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with personal bonds and two sureties of Rs.20,000 each.

What the court decided

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:45086

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3932 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar @ Kallu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- O.P. Tiwari 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

None appears on behalf of the respondent no.2 despite service of notice.

¶8

In terms of the F.I.R., it was alleged that the daughter of the informant aged about 15 years had opened the door to the applicant thinking that her brother had come and as soon as the door was opened, the applicant caught her hold and took her to an agricultural field and committed wrong on her. Similar statements were given by the victim under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. The incident is said to have taken place on 6.1.2024.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the medical examination of the victim was done on 8.1.2024 which does not support the allegations of any forceful sexual intercourse. No injury was observed on the body of the victim.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn my attention to the statement of the victim's mother wherein she stated that adjacent to the place where the victim was sleeping, the mother alongwith her children were also present. From the over all statement and the statement of the mother of the victim coupled with the medical on record, prima facie there appears to be lack of credibility in the statements of the victim. The tentative age of the victim as per the educational record is around 17 years and six months.

¶11

As regards the age of the victim, learned counsel for the applicant states that for the age of the victim shall be determined at the time of the trial in view of the law laid down in the case of Monish Vs. State of U.P. passed by this Court in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.55026 of 2021 decided on 9.2.2023. The applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 12.1.2024, hence the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶12

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

¶13

Considering the aforesaid facts coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is in custody since 12.1.2024 and in view of the law laid down in the case of Monish Vs. State of U.P. (supra) decided on 9.2.2023. with regard to the determination of the age of the victim, 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.

¶14

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶15

Let the applicant Rakesh Kumar @ Kallu be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.05 of 2024, under Section 376 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act, Police Station Fatehpur Chaurasi, District Unnao on his furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

(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.

¶19

Order Date :- 2.7.2024

¶20

Shukla

¶21

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

Rakesh Kumar @ Kallu 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

Rakesh Kumar @ Kallu 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ram Sumer @ Sumer Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Mahesh Kumar Soni @ Mahesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Hanuman Prasad Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Vijay Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Lko.

Avneesh Kumar Nishad @ Aneesh Nishad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Mustakeen Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. of U.P. Lucknow