Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Molhey Vs. State of U.P.

Molhey vs State of U.P.

Type Court Judgment Court Allahabad Decided Aug 27, 2010
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/918959

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Allahabad High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
BAIL No. - 6648 of 2010
Subject
Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Criminal

Key legal issue
Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Molhey

Advocate Ashok Kumar Singh; Suraj Saran, Advs

Respondent

State of U.P.

Advocate Govt. Advocate

Excerpt

1. heard learned counsel for the accused applicant and learned counsel for the state. 2. perused the f.i.r., medical report and other relevant papers filed in support of the bail application. 3. submission of the learned counsel for the accused applicant is that according to medical report no definite opinion regarding rape could be given and the age of prosecutrix according to the radiological report was about 16-17 years. it is further submitted by the learned counsel that in the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under section 164 cr.p.c. she stated that she went with accused applicant to lucknow. it is also stated that the applicant married the prosecutrix as averred in para 7 of the bail application. it is also stated that there could be variation of two years on either side in age and since the benefit is given to the accused, as such, it could be said that the prosecutrix was major and was a consenting party. learned counsel also submits that the accused applicant is in jail since 12.01.2010 as averred in para 2 and has no previous criminal history as averred in para 17 of the bail application. 4. considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the accused applicant be enlarged on bail in case crime no. 1160 of 2009, u/s 363, 366, 368, 376 i.p.c., p.s. laharpur, district sitapur on his furnishing a personal bond and two local and reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned/remand magistrate. 

Full Judgment

1. Heard learned counsel for the accused applicant and learned counsel for the State.

2. Perused the F.I.R., medical report and other relevant papers filed in support of the bail application.

3. Submission of the learned counsel for the accused applicant is that according to medical report no definite opinion regarding rape could be given and the age of prosecutrix according to the radiological report was about 16-17 years. It is further submitted by the learned counsel that in the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she stated that she went with accused applicant to Lucknow. It is also stated that the applicant married the prosecutrix as averred in para 7 of the bail application. It is also stated that there could be variation of two years on either side in age and since the benefit is given to the accused, as such, it could be said that the prosecutrix was major and was a consenting party. Learned counsel also submits that the accused applicant is in jail since 12.01.2010 as averred in para 2 and has no previous criminal history as averred in para 17 of the bail application.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, let the accused applicant be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 1160 of 2009, u/S 363, 366, 368, 376 I.P.C., P.S. Laharpur, District Sitapur on his furnishing a personal bond and two local and reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned/Remand Magistrate. 

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial