Allowed

Meraj @ Bablu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC23 Aug 2024BAIL/9025/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a bail application in a POCSO and IPC case alleging sexual assault on a child. The court noted the medical report indicated no injury or intact hymen, finding prima facie material to corroborate the assault was missing. The applicant was released on personal bond with sureties under standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with a personal bond and two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each on conditions to attend hearings and not commit offences.

Meraj @ Bablu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:57577

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9025 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Meraj @ Bablu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Kumar Yadav,Anoop Vajpayee Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶6

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record. None has appeared for respondent no.2 despite notice.

¶7

2. The applicant seeks enlargement on bail in FIR No.0085 of 2024, under Section 376AB of IPC & Section 5m/6 of POCSO Act, P.S. Bazar Khala, District Lucknow.

¶8

3. In terms of the FIR, it was alleged that on 20.05.2024, daughter of the informant aged about 5 years had gone to purchase some biscuits when the applicant enticed her and inserted finger in the private parts. The medical of the victim was done which did not indicate any injury in the private part; the hymen was found to be intact.

¶9

4. Learned counsel for the applicant argues that the FIR was a sequel to the dispute in between the informant and the applicant for which the applicant was also beaten up, however, his FIR was not registered as the present FIR came to be registered prior in point of time.

¶10

5. Learned AGA has opposed the bail application.

¶11

6. Considering the medical on record, prima-facie, the material to corroborate the penetrative sexual assault as defined under Section 3 of POCSO Act and rape as defined under Section 375 IPC are apparently missing. As such, considering the medical report not corroborating the allegation, the applicant who is in custody since 21.05.2024 and has no criminal history, is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed.

¶12

7. Let the applicant Meraj @ Bablu be released on bail in aforesaid FIR number on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs.20,000/- each to the satisfaction of court

¶13

concerned with the following conditions:

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

(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.

¶17

Order Date :- 23.8.2024

¶18

nishant

¶19

Digitally signed by :- NISHANT MOHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Meraj @ Bablu v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Meraj @ Bablu 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

Sana Ullah Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Surjeet Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Chotu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Ritesh Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Rafiullah Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko.

Riyajul Hasan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.