The High Court granted bail to the applicant in a rape case involving POCSO violations, conditioned on personal bond and sureties, without expressing opinion on merits, and directed the trial court to conclude the trial within six months.
Released on bail with a personal bond and two local sureties subject to specified 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. - 18149 of 2018
Applicant :- Suresh Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Adya Prasad Tewari,Kamlesh Kumar Tiwari,Sheo Shankar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant – Suresh Yadav with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.34 of 2018, under sections 376D, 506 I.P.C. & Section 3/4 POCSO Act, PS. Belghat, District Gorakhpur.
It is argued by learned coun s el for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. As per prosecution case the prosecutrix had gone out side the house at 9.30 P.M. to nature's call and at that time the applicant alongwith one co-accussed Rohan Yadav came there and forcibly took the victim on motorcycle, thereafter both the applicant and co-accused committed rape upon her. In the statement recorded 164 Cr.P.C. she has supported the prosecution version stating that she was pushed on the field and sexually assaulted by the applicant and co-accused, however, the same has not been supported by the medical evidence. As per medical report she is aged about 18 years. The victim has been examined as PW-2 and she has turned hostile and not supported the prosecution case. Learned counsel has pressed this application on the ground of period of detention as the applicant is in jail since 24.2.2018 as such has undergone more than one year and eight months incarceration. It is next contended that the applicant has no criminal history and 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. Accordingly, he requests for bail.
Learned counsel for the State 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 facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the
dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , 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 not indulge in any criminal activity. (ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
(iv) The applicant shall regularly appear on the dates fixed by the trial court unless his personal attendance is exempted by the trial court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, it will be open to the opposite parties to approach the Court for cancellation of bail.
However, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same within six months from the production of certified copy of this order., if there is no legal impediment.
Office is directed to communicate the copy of this order forthwith to concerned court for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 15.11.2019
Rk
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the applicant charged under sections 376D IPC and POCSO Act.
Whether the conditions of bail and expedited trial can be ordered.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and anotherReferred¶10
Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
Suresh Yadav
Manju Rani Chauhan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
