Allowed

Jiyaul Samad v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC11 Sept 2018BAIL/21158/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court granted bail to the applicant charged with offences including Section 354 IPC and POCSO. It held that despite the nature of accusation, the applicant is entitled to release considering the severity of punishment, evidence scrutiny, and reformative theory of punishment.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond with two sureties subject to standard conditions and expedite trial.

Jiyaul Samad Vs State of U.P. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 55

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21158 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Jiyaul Samad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rameshwar Prasad Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anand Pati Tiwari

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri R.P.Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri A.P. Tiwari, 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 her father alleging that the accused-applicant had tried to have unnatural sex and outrage the modesty of the complainant and her step sister.

¶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 first wife of the applicant had expired thereafter he performed second marriage. The applicant has two daughters one from earlier wife and one from the second wife. The applicant used to live outside his house for his work to earn his livelihood and when he came to know from so many people that his second wife developed illicit relation with the neighbours for which she was scolded and beaten by him. In retaliation she with the connivance of his daughters falsely roped him in the present case. The court has also perused the statement of the first informant recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. which is contradictory. There is no independent witness to 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 since23.4.2018. 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 Jiyaul Samad involved in Case Crime No. 913 of 2018, under Sections 354, 354(Ga) 323, 506, I.P.C &sec.7/8 POCSO Act, P.S.Indrapuram, District- Ghaziabad 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:

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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.

¶16

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.

¶17

Order Date :- 11.9.2018 IA

Jiyaul Samad v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jiyaul Samad 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

Amaruddin Vs State of U.P.

Satish @ Pandit Vs State of U.P.

Shamim @ Vashim Vs State of U.P.

Jabbir Ali Vs State of U.P.

Sunil Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Sugriv Kumar Vs State of U.P.