Allowed

Pawan Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC25 Mar 2019BAIL/11197/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminalmiscible bail application under Section 437 Cr.P.C. wherein the Court granted bail to the applicant accused of gang rape. The Court relied on the absence of independent witnesses, delay in FIR, and the applicant's clean record, without expressing an opinion on the merits.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties, subject to standard conditions of not tampering with evidence and appearing in court.

Pawan Kumar Vs State of U.P. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11197 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Pawan Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anwar Hussain Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.

¶5

This case has been assigned by the Hon'ble The Chief Justice vide order dated 25.3.2019.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶7

According to prosecution case, FIR was lodged on 21.12.2018 on the basis of application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. alleging that on 10.7.2018 complainant was gang raped by by Pawan, Dharmendra, Lakhan and Subhash.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is languishing in jail since 22.1.2019(more than two months) having no criminal history. He has been falsely implicated. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that Case Crime No. 874 of 2018 was lodged under Section 377,511, 504, 506 IPC and 7 & of POCSO Act against husband, Dewar and Jeth of the prosecutrix on 25.10.2018 on the bass of application moved under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., hence in counter blast, this FIR has been lodged. Story shown in the FIR is unnatural and unbelievable. The Prosecutrix is married lady according to FIR itself and she is major. The prosecution story is not supported by medical evidence. There is no independent witness. Delay in lodging the FIR has not been properly explained. In case applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶9

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant. He admitted that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶10

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation, period of custody, gravity of offence and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let applicant Pawan Kumar involved in Case Crime No.1125 of 2018, under Section 376-D, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station

¶12

Firozabad North, District Firozabad be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:

¶13

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶14

The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶15

The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶16

The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶17

The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶19

Order Date :- 25.3.2019 P.P.

Pawan Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pawan Kumar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Irshad Quraishi Vs State of U.P.

Sarfaraj Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dilip Kumar Vs State of U.P.

durgesh Vs State of U.P.

Asif Vs State of U.P.

Shiv Prasad Chauhan Vs State of U.P.