Allowed

Pramod Chauhan v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC10 Nov 2020BAIL/28057/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to Pramod Chauhan in a case involving enticement of a minor girl under sections 363, 366, 37D IPC and POCSO Act. The Supreme Court, relying on the principle in Data Ram, held that the applicant is entitled to bail despite the severity of charges.

What did the court decide?

Respondent released on bail by executing personal bond and furnishing two sureties under specified conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28057 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Pramod Chauhan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Devendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶6

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 235 of 2017, under Sections 363, 366, 37D I.P.C., Section 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act and Section 3/4 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, P.S. Ranipur, district-Mau, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶7

The first information report of the incident was lodged by the complainant regarding disappearance of his minor daughter. It was alleged in the FIR that daughter of the complainant was enticed away by one Govind with the assistance of other co-accused persons.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that although the applicant was not named in the FIR but the victim in her statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. (annexure-3) has supported the prosecution case but the same cannot be accepted on its face value, especially in the absence of any corroboration by medical evidence. He next submits that as per medical opinion the victim is aged about eighteen years and no external or internal injury was found on her body. Further submission is that similarly placed other co-accused Deepak Chauhan has already been enlarged on bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 24.2.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 33498 of 2018, copy whereof has been filed as Annexure-6 to the affidavit accompanying the bail application. He lastly submits that the applicant, who is in jail since 21.9.2017 and has no criminal antecedents to his credit is entitled to be enlarged on bail during pendency of the trial.

¶9

The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A.

¶10

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the

¶11

accused, severity of the punishment, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, considering the law laid down in the case of Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2018(3) SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial.

¶12

Let the applicant, Pramod Chauhan be released on bail in the aforesaid case on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶13

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

¶14

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶15

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

¶16

It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶18

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by learned counsel for the applicant along with a self attested identity proof of the said persons (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.

¶19

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.

¶20

Order Date :- 10.11.2020 Faridul

Pramod Chauhan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pramod Chauhan 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Niyajuddin @ Akku Vs State of U.P.

Anand Bhati @ Aditya Vs State of U.P.

Akhlakh Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Subham Yadav @ Shanu Vs State of U.P.

Sudhakar Yadav @ Chhotu Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Kumar Vs State of U.P.