Allowed

Sikandar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC7 Dec 2020BAIL/3416/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge court granted bail to the applicant in a criminal case involving rape and POCSO charges, imposing conditions to prevent tampering with witnesses and ensuring trial court presence.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Sikandar to be released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two local sureties, subject to strict conditions regarding witness tampering and court presence.

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

¶1

Court No. - 36

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3416 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Sikandar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Viveka Nand Rai,Nilay Kumar Pandey,Sanjeev Kumar Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajeet Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 223 of 2019, under Sections 376D/34, 504, 506 IPC & 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Saraymir, District Azamgarh.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to the FIR on 19th September, 2019 at about 9:45 a.m. victim was going to school where applicant and co-accused came with unknown Bolero car and applicant by putting handkerchief over the face of victim took her inside the vehicle thereafter took away her at a deserted place where on the point of countrymade pistol forcefully feed two laddu to her due to which she became unconscious thereafter they committed rape upon her in the vehicle one by one and by pushing her from the vehicle at a deserted place they ran away. He submits that after three days of the incident FIR has been lodged. In statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., victim has stated that after the incident she went to school while in statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has stated that after the incident she went to her house and narrated the story. He submits that victim in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. stated that applicant and co-accused after taking off her from the car put her to sleep while in statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she has stated that applicant and co-accused pushed her from the vehicle. He submits that if she was pushed from the vehicle then she must have received injuries but as per medical report no injury and no spermatozoa has been found. As per radio-logical report, age of the victim has been found above 18 years and less than 22 years. He submits that coaccused having identical footing has been enlarged on bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 07.07.2020 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 18261 of 2020, therefore, the applicant is entitled for bail on the ground of

¶8

parity. 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 there is no criminal history of the applicant and he is languishing in jail since 23.09.2019.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and submit that victim in her statement under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C., has levelled allegations of rape against the applicant and as per High School Certificate, date of birth of the victim is 15th July, 2003 according to which at the time of incident she was minor aged about 16 years.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, statement of victim under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., radiological age of the victim, also perusing the material on record, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Sikandar involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his/her 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 :-

¶11

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial. The applicant 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.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the

¶15

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

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

¶17

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.

¶18

Order Date :- 7.12.2020 Israr

Sikandar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sikandar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramesh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ravi Diwakar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dilshad @ Bhoora Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shakeel Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sushpendra @ Shashivendra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Guddi Devi Vs State of U.P.