Allowed

Amrit Lal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC5 Jan 2024BAIL/72/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Sections 363/366/376 IPC and POCSO Act, the singular bench allowed the bail for the first applicant after observing that the victim had not supported the prosecution case in her own statement, refused medical examination, and no criminal antecedents existed for the applicant.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Amrit Lal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:12174

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 72 of 2024 Applicant :- Amrit Lal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶5

Counter affidavit filed by the learned AGA is taken on record.

¶6

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

¶7

In the FIR, it is alleged that the applicant with the help of coaccused Dilip has enticed away the minor daughter of the informant on 24.09.2023.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim on her own accord and free will went away with the applicant to Ludhiana, where both of them married and stayed together for 15 days in a rented accommodation. While giving statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has repeated the version as stated in the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and has not supported the prosecution case. The victim has refused to undergo for the internal medical examination before the doctor. There is no corroborative medical evidence. Deliberately, no radiological test of the victim has been got conducted by the I.O. because she was major, however, in the educational record, age of the victim is 16 years and 9 months.

¶9

It is further submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 09.10.2023 without having any criminal antecedent. 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 A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

On due consideration to the statements of the victim under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. wherein she has not supported the prosecution case as well as denial of the victim to undergo for the medical examination and considering the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 09.10.2023 without having

¶12

any criminal antecedent 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.

¶13

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant, Amrit Lal, involved in Case Crime/FIR No. 237/2023, under Sections 363/366/376 IPC, Section 3(2)(v) of S.C./S.T. Act and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station - Ikauna, District - Shrawasti, 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:-

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

(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.

¶19

(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.

¶20

(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.

¶21

Order Date :- 8.2.2024/R.C.

¶22

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

Amrit Lal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amrit Lal v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of 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

Sonu Kumar Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

Kuldeep Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Ishityaqk @ Manne Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Arun Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Deptt. of Home and 3 Others

Mohd. Sohel Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Lko.

Ramveer Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrett. U.P. Lko.