Allowed

Rahmat Sheikh v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home and 3 Others

Allahabad HC8 May 2024BAIL/4944/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed bail for the applicant accused under IPC and POCSO Act, noting that the victim's statements under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. did not support the prosecution story and there was no definite document regarding the victim's age.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted subject to furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of Rs. 20,000 each.

Rahmat Sheikh vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:35568

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4944 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Rahmat Sheikh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Raghunath Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri V. K. Yadav learned AGA and perused the record. No one appears for the opposite party no.2 despite notice.

¶7

The accused-applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.488 of 2022 under section 363, 366, 344, 376(3) IPC and section 5/6 POCSO Act, P.S. Sushant Golf City, District Lucknow.

¶8

In terms of the FIR, a missing person report was lodged alleging that the sister of the informant was enticed away by the applicant, subsequently, in the statement under section 161 Cr.P.C., the victim stated that she was on talking terms with the applicant and was in love with him and had gone out of her own free will and stayed at Kolkata for a substantial time. In somewhat similar statement was given under section 164 Cr.P.C. There is no definite document with regard to the age of the victim in terms of the prosecution under section 94 of the Juvenile Justice Act.

¶9

Considering the two statements under section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., not supporting the prosecution story, the applicant who is in custody since 12.01.2024 and has no criminal history is entitled for the bail. Thus the bail application is allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant Rahmat Sheikh be released on bail in aforesaid first information report number subject to his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- (Twenty Thousand) each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

(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.

¶14

Order Date :- 8.5.2024 VNP/-

¶15

Digitally signed by :- VISHVANATH PRASAD SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rahmat Sheikh v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahmat Sheikh v. State of U.P. Thru. Its 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

Suraj Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

Raj Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Qaiyum Ahmad Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Civil Home Lko.

Amit Tiwari @ Babban Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Hazi Shahbaz Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Homr Civil Sectt. Lko

Ashish Kumar Srivastava @ Ashish Srivastava Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.