Allowed

Amit Savita @ Anshu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Home Deptt., Lucknow and Others

Allahabad HC14 May 2024BAIL/5202/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This criminal bail application concerns the detention of an applicant accused of POCSO and IPC offences. The court issued interim bail conditioned on the applicant marrying the prosecutrix in a social marriage, registering it, and ensuring her safety given her pregnancy. The applicant was directed to appear next with marriage documents.

What the court decided

AI extract

Amit Savita @ Anshu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Home Deptt., Lucknow and Others — Allahabad HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Court No. - 11

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5202 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Amit Savita @ Anshu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Home Deptt., Lucknow And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Neeraj Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Akhilendra Kumar Goswami,Pramod Kumar Yadav

¶4

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Neeraj Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Vishwaas Saraswat, learned A.G.A.

¶6

Shri Pramod Kumar Yadav has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant/ informant and Shri Akhilendra Kumar Goswami has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of the victim and the same are taken on record.

¶7

As per the learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is in jail since 10.03.2024 in Case Crime No.149 of 2023, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and Section 5-J (2)/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, Police Station- Bighapur, District- Unnao.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the case as he has not committed any offence as alleged. Attention has been drawn towards the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., wherein she has stated that when she was about 17 years, she came in affairs with the present applicant, thereafter she left her house with the present applicant and in the month of June, 2023, she got married with him. Thereafter, she was living with him as husband and wife. However, on the complaint of her father, her husband has been

¶9

arrested on 10.03.2024, since then he is in jail/ judicial custody.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that presently, the prosecutrix is living with her mother-in-law in her place and she is presently pregnant of eight months. As per her date of birth in the High School Certificate, she has attained the majority. Learned counsel has submitted that today the prosecutrix and the mother of the applicant are present in the Court and this Court may verify the aforesaid submission from them. Upon that request, the prosecutrix, 'X' has been called with her mother-in-law (mother of the applicant) and both the aforesaid persons have confirmed the submission so made by learned counsel for the applicant to the effect that the prosecutrix is pregnant of eight months and is living with her mother-in-law in her house.

¶11

Learned counsel for the prosecutrix has also stated that the same thing which has been stated by the prosecutrix herself.

¶12

Shri Pramod Kumar Yadav learned counsel for the complainant/ informant/ father of the prosecutrix has stated that the marriage of his daughter is not a legal marriage as she got married with the applicant when she was minor. Therefore, the present applicant is not entitled for bail.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. has also submitted that though at the time of incident in question, the prosecutrix was minor but if she is living with her mother-in-law (mother of the applicant) and she is pregnant of eight months, any appropriate order may be passed protecting the interest of the prosecutrix and prosecution.

¶14

Considering the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the parties and also the statement of the prosecutrix and her

¶15

mother-in-law, who are present in the Court, I find it appropriate that the present applicant may be enlarged on interim bail till 20.08.2024. He shall furnish the sureties of Rs. 20,000/- and personal bond of the same amount before the trial court.

¶16

10. List on 20.08.2024.

¶17

Immediately after release from jail, he shall get married with the prosecutrix as social marriage so that their marriage could be known to the society as early as possible. Thereafter, they shall get their marriage registered with the expedition as far as possible considering the physical condition of the prosecutrix as she is pregnant of eight months.

¶18

During the period he is out of judicial custody, he shall cooperate in the trial proceedings and during the aforesaid period, he shall not leave the State/ Country and shall not misuse the liberty of the bail.

¶19

Considering the conduct of the applicant, his interim bail order may be converted into final bail order when the case is next listed.

¶20

After release from jail, the applicant shall look after his wife properly and shall take all possible endeavours to provide her proper treatment since she is pregnant. Thereafter, he shall look after his wife and child.

¶21

On the next date, both the applicant and prosecutrix shall appear in person alongwith marriage certificate and photocopy thereof may be taken on record.

¶22

If the applicant violates any of the aforesaid conditions, liberty is given to the prosecutrix or informant or prosecution to

¶23

take appropriate steps against the present applicant and if the prosecutrix files any complaint against the applicant for violating the aforesaid conditions, his interim bail order shall stand cancelled and he may be taken into judicial custody again.

¶24

When the case is next listed, name of Shri Pramod Kumar Yadav and Shri Akhilendra Kumar Goswami shall be printed in the cause list as counsel for the complainant/ informant and counsel for the victim.

¶25

Order Date :- 14.5.2024 Mohd. Sharif

¶26

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Amit Savita @ Anshu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Home Deptt., Lucknow and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Amit Savita @ Anshu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Home Deptt., Lucknow and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sudhir Saxena Vs State of U.P. C.B.I. / S.P.E. Lucknow

Vijay Shankar Bajpai @ Pappoo Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Savitri Devi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Umesh Dikshit vs Smt. Indra Agnihotri and 5 Others

Rohit Kumar Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Hari Kishan Sahu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy., Home, Lucknow