Criminal Appeal against bail rejection in a POCSO case. Court held that a case for bail is made out, setting aside the impugned order and granting bail.
Release of the appellant-appellant on bail with personal bond and 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. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1717 of 2018
Appellant :- Ajay Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Ved Prakash Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Annexure-CA-1 of the counter affidavit filed by learned AGA indicates that the notice on opposite party no.2 has been duly served as directed by the Court earlier but no one has appeared on his behalf.
Heard Shri Ved Prakash Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This appeal has been filed against the judgement and order dated 24.1.2018 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge, POCSO Act, Court No.6, Shahjahanpur, in Bail Application No.127 of 2018, arising out of Case Crime No.1628 of 2017, under Sections 376, 511, 506 I.P.C., section 3(1)(ii) of SC/ST Act and 7/8 of POCSO Act, P.S. Tilhar, District Shahjahanpur, by which bail plea of appellant has been rejected.
Submission of learned counsel for the appellant is that he has been falsely implicated in this case. As per the first information report, the appellant is about thirteen years of age. The prosecution version of rape is not supported by medical evidence and the prosecutrix is aged about seven years. Her hymen was found intact. There is no allegation of attempted rape on the applicant, who is languishing in jail since 15.7.2017.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the appellant but could not point out anything material to the contrary.
Having heard the submission of learned counsel for the applicantappellant, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of accusation against appellant and evidence in support of it and unlikelihood of conclusion of trial in near future, I find that a case for bail has been made out.
In the result, appeal stands allowed. The order dated 24.1.2018 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge, POCSO Act, Court No.6, Shahjahanpur, in Bail Application No.127 of 2018, arising out of Case Crime No.1628 of 2017, under Sections 376, 511, 506 I.P.C., section 3(1) (ii) of SC/ST Act and 7/8 of POCSO Act, P.S. Tilhar, District Shahjahanpur, is set aside.
Let appellant-applicant-Ajay Kumar, be released on bail in aforesaid case on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant-appellant will co-operate with the trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.
(ii) The applicant-appellant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant-appellant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
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.
Order Date :- 18.9.2018 Hasnain
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a case for bail is made out despite the nature of the accusation and potential delay in trial conclusion.
4 provisions across 2 enactments
Ajay Kumar
State Of U.P.
Rajul Bhargava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
