Allowed

Kuldeep v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow and Others

Allahabad HC14 May 2024BAIL/5187/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail application of Kuldeep, a co-accused in a POCSO/abduction case involving a minor. Granting bail on parity with a co-accused who was already released, noting the applicant had no criminal record. Specific bail conditions were imposed to prevent tampering with evidence and ensure court attendance.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to strict conditions against tampering and ensuring court presence.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:36877

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5187 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Kuldeep Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ambrish Kumar Pandey,Manoj Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA for the State and Shri Prakash Pandey, learned Advocate appearing for the complainant who has filed vakalatnama which is taken on record.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the statements of the victim recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., there is no allegation against the present applicant. The allegation of rape is made on the co-accused Ajay Chauhan @ Baldhari only. The victim is major as per own affidavit filed in writ petition No. 7965/2023. Co-accused Ajay Chauhan @ Baldhari has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 13.02.2024 passed in criminal misc. bail application No. 1195 of 2024. The applicant seeks parity with the order of said co-accused. He also submits that case of the applicant is on better footing than that of coaccused Ajay Chauhan @ Baldhari.

¶9

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.

¶10

Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail application.

¶11

Learned AGA has further submitted that as per the transfer certificate and also as per the order of Bal Kalyan Samiti dated 08.08.2023, the victim was minor aged about 13 years and 7 months at the time of offence and therefore, bail should be refused.

¶12

Perused the record. The transfer certificate cannot be the parameter for ascertaining the age of a juvenile as per Section 94 of J.J. Act.

¶13

On due consideration to the record as well as case diary which has been produced by the learned AGA, so also the bail order of the co-accused Ajay Chauhan @ Baldhari and the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 16.03.2024 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 on the ground of parity.

¶14

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶15

Let the applicant, Kuldeep, involved in Case Crime/FIR No. 247/2023, under Sections 363/366/376(3)/342/506 IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station - Kaudia, District - Gonda, 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:-

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

(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

¶19

facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶20

(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.

¶21

(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 Code.

¶22

(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.

¶23

Order Date :- 14.5.2024

¶24

R.C.

¶25

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

Kuldeep v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuldeep v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow and 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

Bal Mukund Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Ajay Singh @ Lucky Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Mradu Bhawani Singh @ Mradu Bhawani Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Kapura Devi @ Kapuri Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another

Javed Khan and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another

Amit Kumar Dixit Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another