Allowed

Arun Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC14 Dec 2020BAIL/11078/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the High Court Allahabad considered the prayer for release on bail in a case involving rape and abduction of a minor under Sections 376 IPC and POCSO Act. The court granted bail subject to strict conditions to prevent tampering with evidence and absence from trial.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two local sureties subject to conditions not to tamper with evidence, appear in court, and abide by strict conditions regarding adjournments.

Arun Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Another — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 36

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11078 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Arun Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Parmeshwar Kr. Chaudhary,Neeraj Srivastava,Sandeep Kumar Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pankaj Kumar Mishra,Tapan Kumar Mishra

¶4

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 522 of 2019, under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station Inchauli, District Meerut.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that incident occurred on 7.3.2018 and after about 8 months FIR was lodged. He further submits that according to FIR, victim was raped in the house of Mool Chand, but as per the site plan incident occurred in the house of Tejpal. As per FIR, victim also became pregnant and applicant gave medicine due to which pregnancy was aborted. At the time of incident victim was 17 years old. The applicant has not committed the alleged offence. He has been falsely implicated in the present case. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next contended that there is no previous criminal history of the applicant and is languishing in jail since 10.1.2020.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and submits that as per FIR and statement of victim, applicant committed rape upon her and also aborted her pregnancy , therefore, the applicant is not entitled for bail.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, nature of allegation, incident occurred on 7.3.2018 and FIR was lodged on 29.11.2019, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant-

¶10

Arun Kumar involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-

¶11

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial. The applicant shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶12

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶13

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶15

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶16

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶17

Order Date :- 14.12.2020 Ravi Prakash

Arun Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Chintamani @ Babbu @ Heeramani Bind Vs State of U.P.

Tirari @ Sarjun Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mohit Srivastava Vs State of U.P.

Pankaj Singh Vs State of U.P.

Saddam Husain Vs State of U.P.