Allowed

Man Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Nov 2019BAIL/36129/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application by Man Singh in a case involving offences under IPC and POCSO Act. The single-judge court considered the applicant's plea of innocence, the victim's statement, and prior criminal history. Despite opposition regarding character and severity of offence, bail was allowed in view of continued detention and pendency, subject to strict bond conditions and an under

What did the court decide?

Released on bail with personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions; trial to be concluded within one year under Section 309 Cr.P.C.

Man Singh Vs State of U.P. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36129 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Man Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Vishwakarma,Raj Kumar Vaishya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Subedar Misra

¶4

Hon'ble Rajendra Kumar-IV,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of applicant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for State as well as learned Counsel for complainant and perused the material available on record.

¶7

Accused-applicant, involved in Case Crime No. 134 of 2016, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Kaundhiyara, District Allahabad, applied for bail.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has committed no offence. Prosecution story is false and fake. Victim is consenting party and she is major at the time of incident and she was well acquainted what was happening with her. Victim is not coming in the Court for evidence. In statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. recorded before Magistrate concerned she stated that she wants marriage with accused and she left her house with accused-applicant on her own will. She remained with accused-applicant and developed relation with him as husband and wife without any force. Applicant is in jail since 06.10.2016 and there is no progress of trial. It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant's fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is further submitted that due to heavy pendency in the court, there is no likelihood of early conclusion of trial. Criminal history has been explained by filing a supplementary affidavit.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned Counsel for complainant have opposed the prayer for bail but did not dispute the factual submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that applicant has already been married to other lady. There is a criminal history of the same offence against him. Accused-applicant enticed the minor victim aged about 16 years and committed rape with her. Consent of minor is not relevant in eye of law. Accused is a man of bad character, if he will released on bail, he will again commit the crime of same nature and offence alleged against applicant is against society which is serious one, therefore, the bail application of the applicant may be rejected.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, rival contention of learned counsel for the parties, detention of applicant in jail, severity of punishment in case of conviction, statement of victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C., evidence collected by Investigating Officer during investigation and without commenting

¶11

upon the merit of the case, applicant deserves bail.

¶12

Accordingly, bail application is allowed.

¶13

Let applicant Man Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties and filing an undertaking to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶14

The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶15

The applicant shall co-operate with the trial and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for charge, evidence when the witnesses are present in the court, statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and argument.

¶16

During trial, he shall not indulge in any criminal activities or case.

¶17

In breach of any condition enumerated above, Trial Court shall be at liberty to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law.

¶18

However, it is provided that Trial Court shall proceed the trial in view of Section 309 Cr.P.C., expedite and conclude the trial within one year from the date of production of certified copy of this order without granting any unnecessary adjournment, if there is no legal impediment.

¶19

Order Date :- 13.11.2019 I.A.Siddiqui

Man Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Man Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pyare Lal Prajapati Vs State of U.P.

Manoj Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Sabir @ Akram Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Santosh Soni Vs State of U.P.

Balveer Singh Vs State of U.P.