Single Bench Court allowed bail to the applicant accused of offences under IPC and POCSO Act. Court observed that victim appears to be a consenting party based on medical age report. Bail granted on personal bond and sureties with strict conditions.
Released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two local sureties each of like amount.
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. - 36
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27786 of 2020
Applicant : Rajababu @ Rajkumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Nanhe Lal Tripathi,Satish Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.
Despite service, no one appears on behalf of opposite party no.2.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.36 of 2019, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Madanpur, District Lalitpur.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to the FIR version date of birth of the victim is 11.4.2003. She went missing since 18.9.2019. It is alleged that when she was not going to school used to talk with the applicant. He submits that incident occurred on 18.9.2019 and FIR has been lodged on 21.9.2019, after a delay of about three days. It is submitted that in her statement recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. she has stated that she went Ahmadabad along with the applicant and wants to marry and lives with him and police caught her at bus-stand Maraura while in her statement recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C. she has stated that she went Ahmadabad and police brought her from Ahmadabad. As per medical report, age of the victim has been ascertained 19 years. It is next submitted that victim appears to be a consenting party. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process 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 next contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 1.11.2019.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail but does not dispute the factual aspects of the matter.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, radiological age and statements of the victim u/s 161 & 164
Cr.P.C, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Rajababu @ Rajkumar involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence and pressurize the witnesses during trial.
(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.
(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.
(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, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(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.
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. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 2.12.2020 m.a.
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant guilty of offences under IPC and POCSO Act is entitled to bail.
Whether the victim is a consenting party based on medical age and statements.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
crl./misc. bail applicationReferred¶8
8 provisions across 3 enactments
Rajababu @ Rajkumar
State of U.P.
Ali Zamin
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
