Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh, J. granted bail to Kuldeep Sahu in a case involving Section 354 IPC, POCSO, etc., relying on Article 21 and stating entitlement to bail. The court directed the trial court to expedite the trial.
Release of applicant Kuldeep Sahu on bail on furnishing personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 55
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30606 of 2018
Applicant :- Kuldeep Sahu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Sri Rahul Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Nanvendra Singh, learned counsel for the complainant and Sri Sanjay Singh, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.
According to the prosecution version the complainant lodged FIR against 2 named persons including the applicant and two unknown persons alleging that when the victim alongwith her mother and brother had gone to the field for grazing the accused-applicant came there and forcibly taken her to another field where he tried to outrage the modesty of the victim, but any how she escaped from the clutches of the applicant. Upon alarm being raised by the victim, her mother and uncle rushed there by that time the applicant managed to flee away from the spot.
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 there is inordinate delay of 15 days in lodging the report for which no plausible explanation has been given by the prosecution. The victim was medically examine, , but no mark of injury was found on the person of the victim. There is some dispute going on between the applicant and Village Pradhan with regard to the land and in connivance with him the complainant has falsely implicated the applicant in the present case. The Court has also perused the statements of the victim recorded under sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C.. The victim is living with her parents.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 7.7.2018. The applicant has no other reported criminal antecedent.
Learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer.
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.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the applicant Kuldeep Sahu involved in Case Crime No. 15 of 2018, under Sections 354(kha), 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C, & sec. 7/8 POCSO ACT, 2012 P.S.Bakewar, District- Fatehpur 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:
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trail and remain present personally on each and every date fixed after release.
(ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.
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 applicant to prison.
The trial court is directed to expedite and conclude the trial of the applicant in the present case as expeditiously as possible from the date of receipt 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 Alakh Alok Sroivastava Vs. Union of India and another reported in AIR 2018(SC) 2004.
Order Date :- 3.10.2018 IA
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to release on bail considering the nature of accusation and evidence.
Whether reasonable apprehension of tempering of witnesses justifies granting bail.
Whether the trial should be expedited after release on bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and anotherRelied on¶9
(2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
Alakh Alok Sroivastava Vs. Union of India and anotherReferred¶16
AIR 2018(SC) 2004 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Kuldeep Sahu
Vivek Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
