The court granted bail to Veerpal Singh in a POCSO and IPC offense case, citing lack of eyewitnesses and prima facie satisfaction of reformative punishment theory under Article 21.
Released on bail subject to personal bond and two sureties of Rs. 2 lac each, with conditions regarding cooperation and non-tampering.
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. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2369 of 2019
Applicant :- Veerpal Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Srivastava,Sunil Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Sri Anil Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material brought on record.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated due to village parti bandi. Further submission is there is contradiction in the statement recorded under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. There is no independent eye witness of the alleged incident. Only general allegations have been made against the applicant. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. Further submission is that applicant who is in jail since 12.12.2018, has no other criminal history and there is also no possibility of his either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. Applicant also undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer.
Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, perused the statements recorded under section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. of the victims, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.
Let applicant Veerpal Singh, be released on bail in Case Crime No. 114 of 2016 (Case No. 233 of 2017), under Sections 323,504,506,452,354 IPC and 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Iglas, District- Aligarh, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties (Rs. Two Lac each) (One should be of a family member) before the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trail and remain present personally on each and every date fixed after release. (ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the
applicant to prison.
Keeping in view the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of Alakh Alok Srivastava v. Union of India and others reported in AIR 2018 SC 2004, trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same expeditiously preferably within a period of one year from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.
Order Date :- 18.1.2019 ssm
2 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the applicant notwithstanding the severity of punishment for the offenses charged.
Whether the case requires expedited trial under the direction of the Apex Court.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and anotherExplained¶8
(2018) 2 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
Alakh Alok Srivastava v. Union of India and othersExplained¶13
AIR 2018 SC 2004 · Who else cites this
4 provisions across 4 enactments
Veerpal Singh
Vivek Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Vivek Kumar Singh
Parties & counsel
