Allowed

Vivek @ Vikki v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC25 Jun 2024BAIL/6963/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Court allowed bail application in a case involving evasion from house and rape. The victim's statement indicates she left voluntarily, and applicant has no criminal history. Bail granted with personal and surety bonds.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each with conditions.

Vivek @ Vikki vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:48170

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6963 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Vivek @ Vikki Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Mishra

¶6

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Satyendra Nath Mishra

¶7

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Abhinav Srivastava, Advocate holding brief of Shri S.N.Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent complainant as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶9

Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent State is taken on record.

¶10

In terms of the F.I.R., initially a missing person report was lodged alleging there that the daughter of the informant was enticed away by some unknown persons. Subsequently, in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the victim stated that she was in love with the applicant for the last two years and had gone out of her own free will. She disclosed her age as 19 years.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the victim has not supported the prosecution story in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. She disclosed her age as 19 years in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. There is no definite document to conclusively determine the age of the victim as has been prescribed under the Juvenile Justice Act readwith the rules framed thereunder and the same shall be decided at the time of the trial. The applicant is in jail since 19.3.2024 having no criminal history, hence, the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶12

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

¶13

Considering the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. coupled with the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 19.3.2024 having no criminal history 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 Vivek @ Vikki be released on bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.39 of 2024, under Sections 363, 366, 376-A I.P.C. and Section 5/6 of the POCSO Act, Police Station Jaisinghpur, District Sultanpur 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 :- 16.7.2024/Shukla

¶20

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

Vivek @ Vikki v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vivek @ Vikki 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vishal Jaiswal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. and 3 Others

Ram Kishore vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Ujair vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Govt. Lko and 3 Others

Amit Kumar vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko.

Ram Dayal vs State of U.P. Thru. Addil. Chief Secy., Food and Civil Supply Lucknow. and Others

Pankaj Raj vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Civil Secrt. Lko.