The High Court granted bail to Santosh Kumar @ Dhakad in a case under sections 376, 323, 452, 504, 506 IPC and POCSO Act, citing contradictions in statements and false allegations. Bail was allowed on conditions, relying on Dataram Singh judgment.
Released on bail on personal bond and two local sureties each of like amount 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. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15618 of 2019
Applicant :- Santosh Kumar @ Dhakad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Santosh Kumar @ Dhakad with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 262 of 2015, under Sections 323, 376, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station- Mau-Aima, District- Allahabad, during pendency of trial.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case as he was having love affair with the victim and when the father of the victim came to know about it, he has lodged a first information report against the applicant with false and frivilous allegations. There is contradiction in the statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., which makes prosecution story doubtful. As per medical report the age of the victim is 18 years. Initially, the F.I.R. was lodged under Sections 376, 511, 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 8 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act, 2012), in which the applicant has already been granted bail vide order dated 18.02.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.6151 of 2019. Subsequently, after investigation charge-sheet has been filed under Sections 376, 323, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act showing the false implication of the applicant and violation of the statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. It is further contended that there is no possibility of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is languishing in jail since 25.08.2018.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the material/evidence brought on record, the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-
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.
Order Date :- 1.8.2019 Radhika
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in a case involving sections 376 and 3/4 POCSO Act with allegations of false implication.
Whether the material on record justifies the release of the applicant on bail subject to conditions.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and anotherReferred¶9
(2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
Santosh Kumar @ Dhakad
Manju Rani Chauhan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
