Allowed

Shyamu Pal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC27 Apr 2018BAIL/13647/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 13647 of 2018, the High Court granted bail to Shyamu Pal accused under sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and POCSO. The court imposed strict conditions regarding attendance, evidence appearance, and prosecution, allowing a one-year trial period.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to strict conditions of court attendance and trial conduct.

Shyamu Pal Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 54

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13647 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Shyamu Pal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sarvesh Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed by the applicant today, is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Sarvesh Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.

¶7

Contention raised at the Bar is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It has been further submitted that as per statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C., the prosecutrix herself that she is a married woman and solemnized with the applicant in a Arya Samaj Mandir. As per medical report her age, is opined to be 16 years by the doctor. Giving margin of two years, she is presumed to be major. It is further submitted that the applicant and the prosecutrix are living as husband and wife. The applicant is in jail since 09.03.2018, having no criminal antecedents to his credit. 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 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.

¶9

Let the applicant Shyamu Pal, involved in Case Crime No. 166 of 2016, under sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and 3/4 of the Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act, P.S. Shamsabad, District Farrukhabad 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:-

¶10

(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.

¶11

(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.

¶12

(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82

¶13

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 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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

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. Order Date :- 27.4.2018

¶17

shailesh

Shyamu Pal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shyamu Pal 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

Anil Soni Vs State of U.P.

Kismatiya Devi Vs State of U.P.

Rakesh Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Awasthi Vs State of U.P.

Babu @ Babu Bhai Vs State of U.P.

Narendra Alias Bhura Vs State of U.P.