Allowed

Ritik @ Anshu Jaiswal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Apr 2018BAIL/13139/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 13139 of 2018, the Hon'ble Court released the applicant on bail involving offences under Sections 363, 363, 376 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act. The court noted the applicant has no antecedents and the case appears false, albeit without deciding merits, and imposed strict conditions to secure presence.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each with strict undertakings regarding court appearances and evidence dates.

Ritik @ Anshu Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 54 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13139 of 2018 Applicant :- Ritik @ Anshu Jaiswal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.

¶2

Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Shabbir,Mohd Shamim Khan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶4

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

¶5

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no.317 of 2017, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Kapilvastu, District Siddharthnagar is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶6

Submission made by the counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It has been further submitted that the FIR was registered by Sri Rakesh Mishra, the father of the victim against the applicant for enticing her away. The girl was recovered after almost 8 months of the incident. After recovery she was put to radiological examination whereby her age comes around 19 years. In 164 Cr.P.C. statement she states that her parents are going to marry her against her wishes and she on her own, call the applicant and went alongwith him and got marry with the applicant. She on her free will have travel different places with the applicant and lived as husband and wife. The applicant is in jail since 10.12.2017, having no criminal antecedents to his credit.

¶7

Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶8

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the

¶9

parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.

¶10

Let the applicant Ritik @ Anshu Jaiswal, involved in case crime no.317 of 2017, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Kapilvastu, District Siddharthnagar be released on bail on 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:-

¶11

(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE 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.

¶12

(ii) 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 IPC.

¶13

(iii) 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., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF 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 IPC.

¶14

(iv) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT, IN PERSON, BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON DATES FIXED FOR (1) OPENING OF THE CASE, (2) FRAMING OF CHARGE AND (3) RECORDING OF STATEMENT UNDER SECTION 313 CR.P.C. IF IN THE OPINION

¶15

OF THE TRIAL COURT ABSENCE OF THE APPLICANT IS DELIBERATE OR WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THEN IT SHALL BE OPEN FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO TREAT SUCH DEFAULT AS ABUSE OF LIBERTY OF BAIL AND PROCEED AGAINST HIM IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶16

(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.

¶17

However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his bail so granted by this court.

¶18

Order Date :- 13.4.2018 VKG

Ritik @ Anshu Jaiswal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ritik @ Anshu Jaiswal v. State of U.P.

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

Similar cases

Jagpreet Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Shahid Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Nitesh Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Udal Singh Vs State of U.P.

Pankaj Rajbhar Vs State of U.P.