In a bail application under Section 354, 354A IPC and POCSO Act, the court, while expressing no opinion on the merit, granted bail subject to specific conditions regarding attendance and avoiding abuse of liberty.
Release on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount, subject to four specific 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. - 16866 of 2019
Applicant :- Khursheed Ahmad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Maurya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Om Prakash Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant Khursheed Ahmad with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 94 of 2019, under Sections 354, 354A I.P.C. and 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station-Kotwali, District-Ballia, during the pendency of the trial.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that as per the allegations made in the first information report lodged on 1st March, 2019 by Raj Kumar Jaiswal i.e. the father of the victim, namely, Navya, on the same date i.e. 1st March, 2019, the applicant took the victim along with him to his shop, where he molested her. It has further been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the entire story as narrated in the first information report is false and concocted, as is evident from the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., wherein the victim has stated that on the date of incident at 08:30 p.m. when she went to the applicant's shop for purchasing bread, the applicant had slapped her due to which there was quarrel between the informant and applicant. It has further been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that he is a shop-keeper and due to some petty issue regarding purchase of some material, he had slapped the victim only. It has further been argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated because he had supported some other party in the assembly elections. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. It is next contended that there is no possibility of the applicant 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 in jail since 2nd March, 2019.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail. However, the learned A.G.A. could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the material on record as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh
Vs. State of U.P. & Another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, 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:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
(Manju Rani Chauhan, J.)
Order Date :- 7.5.2019
Sushil/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in a case under Sections 354, 354A IPC and POCSO Act.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. & AnotherReferred¶9
(2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
Khursheed Ahmad
Manju Rani Chauhan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
