Held that bail is granted to the applicant on personal bond and two local sureties for offences under Section 363, 366, 120B IPC and POCSO Act, subject to strict conditions including cooperation in tracing the minor victim and availability to police.
Released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two local sureties each of like amount.
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. - 17567 of 2019 Applicant :- Tribhuwan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Tiwari,Subhash Chandra Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Babu Ram Yadav
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
List revised.
Case is taken up in the revised call. The learned counsel for the applicant is present but the learned counsel for the informant is not present.
Heard Sri Anil Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Prashant Kumar, 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, Tribhuwan with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 200 of 2018, under Sections 363, 366, 120B I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station- Khuthan, District- Jaunpur , during pendency of trial.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that as per the allegations made in the F.I.R., the neighbour of the informant, namely, Tribhuwan (applicant herein) was inimical to the family of the informant as there was a dispute with respect to property between the two. In order to defame them in the society, on 24.11.2018 at about 10:00 p.m., the son of the applicant, namely, Ajit Kumar Yadav along with one other person came on motorcycle and kidnapped the minor daughter of the informant, namely, Garima, when she had gone for nature's call. The said incident was seen by one Anil Kumar, who came and gave information about the same to the informant. Thereafter, the informant tried to search her daughter but whereabouts of her daughter could not be traced out. It is also alleged that the whole incident is conspired by the applicant and his family members and there are chances of some untowards happening with the daughter of the informant, hence the present F.I.R. has been lodged. It is next submitted that the allegation of taking away the victim is upon son of the applicant, Ajit Kumar Yadav whereas the applicant has been assigned the role of conspiracy, due to enmity with the informant's side. There is no evidence regarding the involvement of the applicant in the alleged incident. It is further submitted that the entire family of the applicant is in jail and no useful purpose would be served in keeping the applicant behind the bars. Though the victim has not yet been recovered but if
the applicant is released from jail, he will co-operate in tracing the victim. The applicant is aged about 60 years and he is languishing in jail since 28.11.2018. The applicant does not have any previous criminal history. In case, he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial by all means. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no chance of applicant fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses.
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.
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 JK Yadav
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is eligible for bail in a case involving kidnapping and offences under the POCSO Act.
Whether conditions for bail can ensure cooperation in tracing the minor victim.
Whether the applicant poses a risk of tampering with evidence or using liberty of bail for further crimes.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and anotherReferred¶10
(2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
Tribhuwan
State Of U.P.
Manju Rani Chauhan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
