SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(ALL) 5266

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
SAINOOR – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
BAIL/52160/2022



Court No. - 79

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52160 of 2022

Applicant :- Sainoor

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others

Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Ji Mishra,Kaushal Kumar Pandey

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Harsh Vijay,Sudhir Kumar

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

Heard Sri Anand Ji Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant,

learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Harsh Vijay, learned counsel

for the complainant and perused the record.

This application has been filed with a prayer to release the

applicant on bail in case crime No. 268 of 2022, under sections

376(3) IPC and section 3/4 (2) POCSO Act, P.S. Kharkhaunda,

District Meerut.

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that

applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case.

Further contended that the present applicant is aged about 20

years and married one. According to medical examination

report the victim has not received any external or internal injury

on her body and lastly argued that applicant is in jail since

20.07.2022.

Per contra learned counsel for the complainant and learned

A.G.A. for the State rebutted the above arguments stating that

applicant-accused is named in the FIR. The statement of victim

is intact as recorded under sections 161 as well as 164 Cr.P.C.,

as per the record the victim is minor and the gravity of the

offence is too much, therefore, the applicant may not be

released on bail

Having considered the submissions raised by the counsel for the

applicant-accused and the objections raised by learned counsel

for the first informant and learned A.G.A. for the State, gravity

and severity of the offence and conduct of the applicant-

accused, I am of the view that prima facie at this stage grounds

are not sufficient to enlarge the applicant-accused on bail.

Accordingly, prayer for bail is refused.

Accordingly, this application is dismissed.

Order Date :- 19.1.2023

RPD

Digitally signed by :-

RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top