Allowed

Manish Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt., Lucknow and Others

Allahabad HC17 Jan 2024BAIL/531/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant sought bail in an FIR alleging abduction and sexual assault of a 15-year-old girl. The court noted the victim's statement and the lack of documentary proof of age under the Juvenile Justice Act. The applicant, with no criminal history, was granted bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing sureties.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted to the applicant in FIR/ Case Crime No. 196 of 2023 on furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:43571

¶2

Court No. - 11

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 531 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Manish Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt., Lucknow And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Kumar Shukla,Pawan Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

1 . Counter affidavit filed today by learned AGA is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record. None turned up on behalf of the complainant despite service of notice.

¶8

3 . In terms of the FIR lodged as a missing person report, it was alleged that some unknown person had enticed the daughter of the informant aged about 15 years, subsequently in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the victim stated that she was on talking terms with the applicant through Facebook and Whatsapp and both of them had gone to a park and subsequently she was touched inappropriately and thereafter physical relations were formed in between them. There is no definite document with regard to the age of the victim as prescribed under Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice Act.

¶9

4. Learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer.

¶10

5. Considering the statement of the victim, the applicant who is in custody since 27.03.2023 having no criminal history is enlarged on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶11

6. Let the applicant Manish Kumar be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No. 196 of 2023, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and Section 5L/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Thakurganj, District Lucknow, 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:

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

(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.

¶15

Order Date :- 19.6.2024 Arun

¶16

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

Manish Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt., Lucknow and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manish Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt., 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

Arjun Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Others

Mohammad Imran Vs Narcotics Control Bureau Lucknow

Shiva @ Shivam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Dharmendra @ Sonu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Pinki Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home U.P. Lko.

Chhotu Khan Vs the State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Others