Allowed

Vedpal v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC14 Dec 2020BAIL/11192/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Single Judge Court allowed a bail application filed by Vedpal, who was not named in the FIR. The court ordered his release on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions to prevent tampering with witnesses and ensure presence in the trial court, particularly for evidence recording and Section 313 Cr.P.C. stages.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount.

Vedpal 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. - 11192 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Vedpal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Pati Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Deepak Singh Patel

¶4

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State, learned counsel for the first informant 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. 228 of 2019, under Sections 363, 366, 376D I.P.C. and Section 6 POCSO Act, 2012, Police Station Kyoladiya, District Bareilly.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is not named in the FIR. In statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. also victim has not disclose name of the applicant. Name of the applicant surfaced in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. He further submits that main accused Ramesh has been enlarged on bail vide order dated 3.12.2020 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 7953 of 2020. 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 19.11.2019 .

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer of the applicant, but could not dispute the fact that main accused Ramesh has been enlarged on bail.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, applicant being not named, enlargement of main accused Ramesh named in the FIR, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Vedpal 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

¶10

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

Vedpal v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vedpal 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.