Allowed

Pitambar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 May 2019BAIL/9994/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed the bail application filed by Pitambar, accused of offences including rape and kidnapping. Granting bail despite the grave nature of charges, citing delay in FIR lodging, conflicting statements by the prosecutrix, and lack of criminal antecedents.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each, subject to conditions against tampering with evidence and intimidation of witnesses.

Pitambar Vs State of U.P. — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9994 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Pitambar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Jatan Yadav,Shivajee Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Brijendra Pratap, learned A.G.A. and perused the record. By means of this application, the applicant-Pitambar who is involved in Case Crime No.305� of 2018, under Sections 376, 363, 342, 323 & 506 I.P.C., P.S. Kasganj, District Kasganj, is seeking enlargement on bail.

¶6

It has been argued by learned counsel for accusedapplicant that applicant is innocent; he has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number; he has neither enticed the girl nor has taken her away; rather prosecutorix was major and she went with him upon her own volition and she remained with him for one moth and thereafter this report was lodged on being tutored by her father, that too after a considerable delay; prosecutorix, in her statement, under Section 161 Cr.P.C., has stated that she has gone with the accused-applicant on her own volition, however, in the statement, under Section 164, Cr.P.C., she said about kidnapping and commission of rape. Accusedapplicant is of no criminal antecedents, hence bail has been prayed for.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts. Perusal of the flirt information report reveals that it was got lodged on 14.5.2018 for an occurrence, which took place on 9.5.2018, i.e., after considerable delay in lodging of the report and it is mentioned in it that had prosecutorix been returned, no case would have been lodged. The prosecutorix was of 17 years of age whereas in the medical examination, she has been held to be age of 18 years. Prosecutorix, in her statement, recorded, under Section 161 Cr. P.C. has said that she went with the accused applicant, on her own will.

¶8

Under all above facts and circumstances considering that there was considerble delay in lodging of first information report; Prosecutorix, in her statement, recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has said that she went with the accused applicant on her own volition; in the medical examination, the prosecutorix is held to be 18 years of age and accusedapplicant is of no criminal antecedents, a case for bail is made out.

¶9

In view of above, considering the rival submissions, nature of accusation, severity of punishment in case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable

¶10

apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, this bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant-Pitambar , involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned, subject to following conditions:

¶12

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶13

The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶14

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

¶15

The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.

¶16

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

¶17

Order Date :- 13.5.2019

¶18

bgs/

Pitambar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pitambar 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

Awadesh Verma Vs State of U.P.

Vikas Harijan Vs State of U.P.

Vivek Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Nishar Ahamad @ Raju and Another Vs State of U.P.

Sushil Rajvansi Vs State of U.P.

Mazahir Husain Vs State of U.P.