This judgment allows a bail application filed by an accused in a POCSO and IPC case. The court considered the Exemplary Bail plea, lack of corroboration, and delay in FIR registration.
Released on bail with personal bond and two local sureties, subject to 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. - 90
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 25493 of 2020
Applicant :- Rahul Paswan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhir Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.
Supplementary affidavit, filed by Sri Sudhir Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant; learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant Rahul Paswan with a prayer to release him in Case Crime No.23 of 2020, under sections 363, 366 and 376 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Haldi, District Ballia during pendency of the trial.
As per F.I.R. version, applicant enticed away the minor daughter of informant on 11.03.2020. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case; there is delay in lodging the F.I.R. but no explanation has been given; the applicant and the victim fell in love and victim eloped with the applicant and went to Ludhiana and she lived with applicant about one week without raising alarm; the applicant is minor and wanted to marry with the victim but parents of the victim are not supporting them; victim ran away with the applicant of her own free will; the statement, recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., is not corroborating the fact narrated in the F.I.R.; the victim and the applicant are consenting party and in order to exert pressure, present F.I.R. has been lodged. Moreover, there is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future due to heavy dockets. It is next submitted that there is no possibility of fleeing away of the applicant from the judicial custody 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 also contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 05.06.2020.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer of the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and the statement of the victim under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C., medical report regarding age of the victim and evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused and the view laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018)3 SCC 22; Rajak Mohammad vs.The State of Himachal Pradesh in Criminal Appeal No.1395 of 2015 and Musauddin Ahmad vs. State of Assam reported in 2009 (14) SCC 541, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Rahul Paswan be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local 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.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
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.
Order Date :- 19.10.2020/Meenu
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to grant bail to the applicant accused in an FIR regarding POCSO and IPC offenses considering the stage of investigation and absence of strong prima facie case.
Whether the delay in lodging the FIR and contradictory victim statement warrants granting bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and anotherReferred¶10
(2018)3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
Rajak Mohammad vs. The State of Himachal PradeshReferred¶10
Criminal Appeal No.1395 of 2015
Musauddin Ahmad vs. State of AssamReferred¶10
2009 (14) SCC 541 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Rahul Paswan
State of U.P.
Deepak Verma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Deepak Verma
Parties & counsel
