High Court judge allowed bail to Ravi Kumar, an applicant falsely accused of enticement under IPC and POCSO, noting the victim was major, FIR was delayed, and there was no medical exam, with conditions to prevent delays.
Applicant released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties in like amount under specified 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. - 6
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26407 of 2020
Applicant :- Ravi Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Bahadur Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,M.P.S. Chauhan
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State and perused the record of the case.
By means of this application, the applicant, who is involved in Case Crime No. 18 of 2020, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and 3/4 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, police station Harduwaganj, district Aligarh, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is absolutely innocent has falsely been implicated in the present case with some ulterior motive. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that as per the prosecution case, in brief, on 29.1.2020 sister of the victim lodged the first information report for the offence under Sections 363, 366 and 120-B IPC with regard to alleged incident dated 24.1.2020 against the applicant and his family members with the allegation inter alia that her sister was enticed away by the applicant in the intervening night of 24.1.2020 with the help of other co-accused persons.
The main substratum of argument of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has falsely been roped in the present case. The first information report has been lodged after five days of the incident. The victim in her statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. did not support the prosecution case. The victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has also disclosed her age about 22 years, and as such, she is major. It is also contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the victim has refused for conducing her medical examination. It is next contended that there is no chance of the
applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. It is also submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedent to his credit and is facing detention since 19.2.2020. Learned counsel for the applicant lastly submitted that if the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the case.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant, but they do not dispute the aforesaid facts, as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant Ravi Kumar be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) 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.
(ii) 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.
(iii) 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.
(iv) 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.
(v) The applicant shall file computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
(vi) The computer generated copy of this order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
(vii) 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.
It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order
Order Date :- 7.12.2020 Sumaira
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant has made out a fit case for enlargement on bail during trial in a case involving offences under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and POCSO.
Whether the delay in filing FIR and victim's non-compliance with medical examination entitles the applicant to bail.
10 provisions across 2 enactments
Ravi Kumar
Sanjay Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
