High Court allowed bail in a gang rape case involving a minor victim, considering concerns about virus spread in jails and the larger mandate of Article 21. Bail granted on specific conditions pending court restoration.
Released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to standard conditions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 82
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13073 of 2020
Applicant :- Ranjeet Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Abrar Ahmad Siddiqui Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Harish Chandra Mishra
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant Shri Harish Chandra Mishra, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A.
The allegation against the applicant is of gang rape alongwith 2- 3 accused persons of the victim.The applicant's father and elder brother have also been implicated in this case.It has been submitted that it is a case of false implication. The victim has made allegations against 2-3 unknown persons also in her statement under section 161 Cr.P.c. that they committed alleged offence along with applicant against her.However in her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. she has stated that no such offence was committed against her, rather she left her house being annoyed with her family members.She has refused to get herself medically examined because she loves the applicant.Applicant had affair with the victim.He was not liked by her family members. As per report of the C.M.O. age of the victim is seventeen years.Given margin of one year on higher side she can be considered to be major. .The applicant is in jail since 3.1.2020 and has no criminal history.
Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid fact.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, argument advanced on behalf of the parties, spreading of novel corona virus in jails, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018)3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant, Ranjeet Yadav, who is involved in Case Crime No. 468 of 2019 under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C, and 3/4 POCSO Act Police Station-Mauaima , District- Prayagraj, 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 10.7.2020 Atul kr. sri.
Digitally signed by JUSTICE SIDDHARTH Date: 2020.07.13 15:07:51 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to grant bail in a gang rape case under IPC Sec 376 and POCSO Act consideration of novel corona virus spread in jails and larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P.Referred¶8
(2018)3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Ranjeet Yadav
State of U.P.
Siddharth
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
