Allowed

Sarik v. State of U.P.Thru. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Allahabad HC24 Jan 2024BAIL/840/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application allowed in a case involving allegations under IPC sections 376(3), 504, 506, POCSO Act, and SC/ST Act. The court noted the victim's refusal for medical examination, denial of viral video allegations, and applicant's lack of criminal antecedents.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed on furnishing personal bonds and two reliable sureties of Rs.20,000/- each, subject to conditions regarding attendance, non-commission of similar offences, and non-interference with evide

Sarik vs State of U.P.Thru. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:30716

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 840 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Sarik Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.Thru. Secy. Home Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Dhananjai Kumar Tripathi,Devendra Verma,Kavita Yadav,Tanupriya

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dileep Kumar Saini,Vivek Kumar Verma

¶6

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶7

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. and Sri Prashant Dubey, learned Counsel for the complainant and perused the record.

¶8

2 . The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.288 of 2023, under Sections 376(3), 504, 506 IPC, Section 3/4(2) of POCSO Act and Section 3(2)V of SC/ST Act, Police Station Matera, District Bahraich.

¶9

3 . In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that the daughter of the informant aged about 12 years when the applicant came and after administering chocolate committed wrong on her. The victim reiterated the same version in the statement under Sections 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C. and also alleged that a video was made and was made viral.

¶10

4 . The Counsel for the applicant draws my attention to the medical on record which records that despite informing the informant about the effect of not getting the medical done, the informant and the victim refused to undergo medical examination. He further draws my attention to the subsequent statement of the informant, wherein, it was specifically stated that the allegations with regard to the video being made viral was not alleged by the informant or the victim at any point of time. The tentative age of the victim is around 15-16 years as per the medical report.

¶11

5. Learned A.G.A. and learned Counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail prayer.

¶12

6. Considering the submissions made at the bar by both the counsel, what transpires is that apart from the allegations

¶13

levelled in the FIR and the two statements, there is no corroboration of the allegations as the victim herself refused to undergo medical examination; the allegation of video being made viral were also denied coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal antecedents and is languishing in jail since 25.11.2023, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed .

¶14

7. Let the applicant Sarik be released on bail in the aforesaid first information report 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:

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

(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.

¶18

Order Date :- 19.4.2024 akverma

¶19

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

Sarik v. State of U.P.Thru. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarik v. State of U.P.Thru. 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

Satya Prakash Mishra Alias Rahul Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. U.P. Lko.

Ravendra Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Priya Mishra Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Santosh @ Sandeep Vs State of U.P.

Vinod Kashyap Vs State of U.P. Thru.Its Prin. Secy. H. and 3 Ors.

Shiv Nandan Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Civil Secrt. Lko.