Allowed

Nanak @ Jai Prakash v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 Dec 2019BAIL/50646/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a second bail application in a gang rape case under IPC and POCSO, the court granted bail despite initial allegations against others, noting the prosecutrix resisted the applicant and her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was contradictory. The applicant was released on personal and surety bond after two years in custody.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on personal bond and two sureties with conditions to appear, not tamper with evidence, and not intimidate witnesses.

Nanak @ Jai Prakash Vs State of U.P. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 66

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50646 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Nanak @ Jai Prakash Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 246 of 2017, u/s 363, 366, 376 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Zarif Nagar, District Badaun with the prayer for enlarging him on bail.

¶7

This is the second bail application. The first bail was rejected by this Court vide order dated 18.4.2018. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that initially the prosecutrix has made allegation of gang rape against the applicant and two others, however, the charge-sheet has only been submitted against the applicant. During trial, the prosecutrix has been examined as PW-2 and in the examination in chief itself she has completely resiled from her statement recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C. and has gone to the extent by stating that the applicant has never enticed her and on being asked by the court that she recognizes the applicant-accused, who is present before the court, her answer was negative. Learned counsel further argued that the applicant is in jail since 19.4.2017 and in the wake of prosecutrix herself turning hostile chances of conviction are quite bleak, besides it, there is no possibility of tampering with the prosecution evidence.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. However he could not point out anything material to the contrary.

¶9

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, considering that the prosecutrix has not supported the prosecution case and applicant is in jail for about two years and nine months, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶10

Let the applicant Nanak @ Jai Prakash involved in the aforesaid case crime number be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶11

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶12

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶13

(iii)The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed.

¶14

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶15

Order Date :- 18.12.2019/Dhirendra/

Nanak @ Jai Prakash v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nanak @ Jai Prakash 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Naieem and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pintoo Agrawal and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Union Bank of India Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Raseed Khan and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Yashu Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Vijay Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P.