Allowed

Satish @ Pandit v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Sept 2018BAIL/14329/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted bail to the applicant, Satish @ Pandit, who was accused of assaulting a minor. Considering the prima facie evidence, the reformative theory of punishment, and the delay in the forensic report, the Court allowed the bail application.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail by furnishing a personal bond with two sureties, subject to specific conditions of conduct and appearance.

Satish @ Pandit Vs State of U.P. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 55

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14329 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Satish @ Pandit Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- R.K. Sinha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mohammad Zakir,Mohd.Zakir

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri R.K.Sinha, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Mohd. Zakir, learned counsel for the complainant and Sri S.S.Tiwari, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

¶6

According to the prosecution version the complainant lodged FIR against three persons including the applicant alleging that the applicant had teased her minor daughter several times and also committed vulgar activities with her and also beaten up her husband.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his prayer for bail submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive and he has committed no offence. It is next contended that the applicant is a handicapped person and real uncle of the victim. The applicant has problem of spinal cord and as such he could not move any where without any support. There is inordinate delay of about 14 days in lodging the report for which no plausible explanation has been given by the prosecution. All the accused are family members of the complainant. The statements of the victim recorded under sections 161 Cr.P.C. & 164 Cr.P.C. are contradictory to each other and thus do not support the prosecution version. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 6.3.2018. The applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent.

¶8

Learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer.

¶9

Considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge and reformative theory of punishment, and also considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶10

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the applicant Satish @ Pandit involved in Case Crime No. 84 of 2018, under Sections 354, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C & Se. 7/8 POcso Act, P.S. Sikandrabad, District-

¶11

Bulandshahar be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:

¶12

(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trail and remain present personally on each and every date fixed after release.

¶13

(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶14

(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.

¶15

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.

¶16

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicants to prison.

¶17

The trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same as expeditiously as possible from the date of production of certified copy of the order, if there is no legal impediment, keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of AlakhAlok Srivastava Vs. Union of India and another reported in AIR 2018(SC) 2004.

¶18

Order Date :- 10.9.2018 IA

Satish @ Pandit v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satish @ Pandit 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Usman Vs State of U.P.

Dayanand Paswan Vs State of U.P.

Bal Kishun Vs State of U.P.

Amaruddin Vs State of U.P.

Shamim @ Vashim Vs State of U.P.

Munna Kol Vs State of U.P.