Allowed¶9

Golu Yadav v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Sept 2020BAIL/18189/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Golu Yadav bail; CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. 18189 of 2020; Sections 376/457 IPC; Sections 3/4 POCSO Act; Section 164 Cr.P.C. victim statement; Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. (2018) 2 SCC 22; Article 21 Constitution of India; Police Station Padari; District Mirzapur; S.T. No. 252 of 2020; Case Crime No. 31 of 2020; bail conditions; cancellation of bail; false implication; no criminal history; Allahabad High Court; Vivek Kumar Singh, J.; order dated 21.9.2020.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Golu Yadav released on bail in Case Crime No. 31 of 2020 (S.T. No. 252 of 2020) on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions of attending and co-operating with the trial, not tampering with witnesses, and not indulging in illegal activities during the bail period. ¶9

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶9

Issue for consideration

Whether applicant Golu Yadav, accused in Case Crime No. 31 of 2020 (S.T. No. 252 of 2020) under Sections 376/457 IPC read with Sections 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Padari, District Mirzapur, should be released on bail.

¶9

Court's answer

Considering the nature of accusation, severity of punishment, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, Article 21 mandate and the dictum in Dataram Singh v. State of U.P., and without expressing any opinion on the merits, the Court found it to be a case of bail.

¶8

Ratio / Principle

Applicant Golu Yadav was directed to be released on bail in Case Crime No. 31 of 2020 (S.T. No. 252 of 2020) on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the magistrate/court concerned.

¶9

Key takeaways

Bail was made subject to conditions: attendance at and co-operation with trial proceedings, no tampering with witnesses, and no indulgence in illegal activities during the bail period; breach of any condition shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.ratio¶13
Observations made in the order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed as a reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.obiter¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bail granted — Allahabad High Court (Vivek Kumar Singh, J.) allowed Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 18189 of 2020 by Golu Yadav, accused in Case Crime No. 31 of 2020 (S.T. No. 252 of 2020) under Sections 376/457 IPC read with Sections 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Padari, District Mirzapur. Applicant in jail since 5.3.2020 with no criminal history; defence relied on the victim's Section 164 Cr.P.C. statement describing her friendship with the applicant and alleged non-corroboration by the medical report. Relying on the dictum in Dataram Singh v. State of U.P., (2018) 2 SCC 22, and without expressing any opinion on merits, the Court granted bail on a personal bond with two sureties, subject to conditions (attendance at trial, no tampering with witnesses, no illegal activities), breach being a ground for cancellation; observations confined to disposal of the bail application.

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18189 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Golu Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Prasad Mishra,Rishikesh Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mithilesh Kumar Srivastava

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri M.K. Srivastava, learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A., appearing for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶6

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Learned counsel for the applicant has next drawn the attention of this Court towards annexure-5 to the affidavit accompanying this bail application, which is the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. wherein the victim herself has stated that she and applicant were good friends. It is further submitted that the medical report does not corroborates with the prosecution story. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 5.3.2020. It has been pointed out that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶7

Learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. have vehemently opposed the prayer.

¶8

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶9

Let applicant- Golu Yadav , be released on bail in Case Crime No.31 of 2020 (S.T. NO.252 of 2020), under Sections- 376/457 IPC read with Section 3/4 pf Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, Police Station- Padari, District- Mirzapur, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-

¶10

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

¶11

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶12

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

¶13

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶14

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶15

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad. The concerned Court shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court, Allahabad.

¶16

Order Date :- 21.9.2020 Dev/-

Golu Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Golu Yadav v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kallu @ Kailash Vs State of U.P.

Naveen @ Ram Mohan Vs State of U.P.

Praveen Kumar Vishwakarma @ Laloo Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mahendra Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Harnam Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shyam Sundar Vs State of U.P.