Pappu v. State of U.P.
Case brief
What is this about?
This judgment rejects a bail application filed by the accused in a child sexual offence case where a minor allegedly claimed rape and subsequent arson. Due to the heinous nature of the allegations, the court refused bail but directed the trial court to conclude the trial within six months.
What did the court decide?
Bail application rejected; trial directed to be concluded within six months.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48883 of 2018
Applicant :- Pappu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Srivastava,Virendra Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
This is an application for bail on behalf of the applicant, Pappu in connection with Case Crime No. 92 of 2018, under Section 323,354-Ka, 326-A, 376 I.P.C. and Section 7/8, 5(ja)5(jha), 6 POCSO Act, Police Station Mahila Thana Rakabganj,District Agra.
Heard Sri Rajesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Akhilesh Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.
The allegation that figures in the FIR and supported by the prosecutrix in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is that the prosecutrix, who is the daughter of the applicant, was ravished by her father while he was inebriated. It is further said by the prosecutrix in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. that when she raised alarm, she was doused in kerosene and set afire. It is further said that she suffered an attack of seizure (the prosecutrix is a patient of epilepsy) and was rescued by her uncle who smothered the flames. It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been implicated on account of the fact that the relationship between him and his wife is estranged and she lives apart from him with three children, while the prosecutrix stayed with the applicant and the applicant's mother, that is to say the prosecutrix's grandmother. It is submitted that it is at the instigation of the applicant's wife that a false allegation has been brought by a tutored the child.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the application for bail should be allowed considering the gravity of the offences under IPC and POCSO.
Whether a timeframe should be imposed for concluding the trial to ensure speedy disposal.
Parties & counsel
- applicant
Pappu
Coram
Munir
J.
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Allahabad HC
- Decided on
- · January
- Registered
- Case no.
- BAIL/48883/2018
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court