Allowed

Saurabh Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC25 Aug 2020BAIL/20570/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court released the applicant, Saurabh Sharma, on bail in a criminal case involving charges of outraging modesty, stalking, and sexual offenses under IPC, SC/ST Act, and POCSO. The court noted discrepancies between the FIR and the victim's statutory statement regarding physical assault.

What did the court decide?

Release of the applicant on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to specific conditions regarding evidence, attendance, and trial proceedings.

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

¶1

Court No. - 34 Case: CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No.20570 of 2020

¶2

Applicant :- Saurabh Sharma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vinod Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Mrs. Sunita Agarwal,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶5

Sri Ashutosh Pandey, learned Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant/first informant. He prays for and is granted permission to file his memo of appearance in the Registry within 24 hours.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.214 of 2019 under Sections 456, 354-A & 504 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(va) of S.C./S.T. Act and 8 POCSO Act, P.S.- Pahasu, District- Bulandshahr.

¶7

Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the assertions made in the first information report are with regard to outraging the modesty of the victim- Poonam, which has not been substantiated from the statement of victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. She had deposed during the course of investigation that only verbal altercation took place between the parties and there was no physical assault on her or any act constituting to commit the offence under Section 354-A and Section 3(2)5A and 8 of POCSO Act.

¶8

Learned A.G.A., however, opposed the prayer for bail.

¶9

Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made, without expressing any opinion as to the merits of the case, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶10

Let applicant- Saurabh Sharma s/o Om Prakash Sharma, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶11

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses;

¶12

(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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;

¶13

(iii) 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;

¶14

(iv) 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; and

¶15

(v) 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.

¶16

Order Date :- 25.8.2020 P Kesari

Saurabh Sharma v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saurabh Sharma 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

Ravi Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Imanuddin Vs State of U.P.

Jhakku Singh @ Brijendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Virendra Rajbhar Vs State of U.P.

Suraj Vs State of U.P.

Sameer Vs State of U.P.