Allowed

Balwant Yadav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Sept 2018BAIL/29953/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted bail to Balwant Yadav in a trial involving offences under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 376 IPC (rape), considering the applicant's incarceration of over six years. The court directed the trial court to expedite the pending trial.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond and two reliable heavy sureties, subject to conditions of not tampering with evidence, cooperating in trial, and reporting monthly. Trial directed to be concluded wit

Balwant Yadav Vs State of U.P. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 52

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29953 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Balwant Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-Balwant Yadav in Session Trial No.147 of 2013 arising out of Case Crime No.180 of 2012, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 376 I.P.C. and 3(2)(5) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Sarai Inayat, District-Allahabad with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶7

This is second bail application. First bail application was rejected on merits as far back as on 12.4.2013.

¶8

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that as per the medical opinion the prosecutrix was 17 years of age and no mark of injury on her external or internal parts of body was noted. He next submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 20.6.2012 i.e. more than six years have elapsed. The trial is in progress in which five prosecution witnesses including the prosecutrix have been examined. Therefore, there is no likelihood of any tampering with the prosecution evidence. He has also drawn attention of this Court to the statement of the doctor who had medically examined the victim in which he has opined that the victim was habitual to sexual intercourse and no injury, whatsoever, was found on any part of her body. Lastly, learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the minimum sentence, which could be awarded for an offence under Section 376 I.P.C., is seven years and the applicant has already undergone six years and two months of incarceration in jail. Therefore, on the ground of long incarceration and also in the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant deserves to be released on bail.

¶9

Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not point out anything material to the contrary.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the age of the prosecutrix, her medical report and especially long detention of the applicant i.e. more than six years, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶11

Let applicant-Balwant Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable heavy sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions that:-

¶12

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses during the investigation or trial;

¶13

(2) He shall cooperate in the trial bonafidely without seeking adjournments and shall remain present on each and every date fixed in the trial;

¶14

(3) He shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶15

(4) He shall report to the Court or trial concerned in the first week of each month till conclusion of trial to show his good conduct or behaviour.

¶16

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the Court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶17

However, considering the fact that the trial is pending since long, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial of aforesaid case and conclude the same in accordance with law without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.

¶18

Order Date :- 6.9.2018

¶19

MN/-

Balwant Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Balwant Yadav 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

Shanker Vs State of U.P.

Tasleem Khan Vs State of U.P.

Devraj @ Ganesh Vs State of U.P.

Satish Singh Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Vijay Kumar Bharti Vs State of U.P.

Raju Vs State of U.P.