Allowed

Naresh Pal v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Nov 2020BAIL/12853/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application regarding rape under Sections 376 IPC and POCSO Act, the Single Judge held the applicant entitled to bail pending trial despite opposing submissions, directing release on personal bond with two sureties subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail with personal bond and two sureties under standard conditions to attend trial and avoid tampering with witnesses.

Naresh Pal Vs State of U.P. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 12853 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Naresh Pal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kuldeep Kumar Dixit,Santosh Singh,Sitaram Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 135 of 2018, under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C. and Section 4 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, P.S. Aliganj, districtBareilly, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶7

The F.I.R. of the incident was lodged by the complainant, alleging therein that her daughter, aged about sixteen years was raped by the present accused on 28.8.2018 at about 11:00 p.m. when she had gone to ease herself.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that as per medical opinion the victim is aged about nineteen years and she was in consensual relationship with the present accused. Her medical report does not indicate any marks of violence, injury or sexual assault (Annexure-3). He further submits that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to some ulterior motive. He lastly submits that the applicant, who is in jail since 22.9.2018 and has no criminal antecedents to his credit is entitled to be enlarged on bail during pendency of the trial.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the victim has specifically nominated the present accused in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. (Annexure-4), hence he is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶10

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of the punishment, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail

¶11

during the pendency of the trial.

¶12

Let the applicant, Naresh Pal be released on bail in the aforesaid case on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶13

The applicant will continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶14

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶15

He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶16

It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.

¶17

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

¶18

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by learned counsel for the applicant along with a self attested identity proof of the said persons (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.

¶19

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.

¶20

Order Date :- 2.11.2020 Faridul

Naresh Pal v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naresh Pal 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

Harjeet @ Arjeet Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jai Prakash Vs State of U.P.

Mohd. Mansoor Alam @ Mannu Vs State of U.P.

Suman Vs State of U.P.

Chhangur Vs State of U.P.

Subhankar Mondal Vs State of U.P.