Allowed

Rajharsh Singh v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC3 Dec 2020BAIL/3580/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court released the applicant on bail in a POCSO case involving charges under IPC 354A and POCSO Section 8, imposed conditions regarding tampering with evidence and cooperation in trial, and deferred surety submission pending restoration of normal court functioning.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail subject to personal bond and conditions; sureties to be furnished within a month of normal court functioning restoration.

Rajharsh Singh Vs State of U.P. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3580 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Rajharsh Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Agrawal,Lalji Yadav,Rameshwar Prasad Mishra,Uttam Singh,Yashpal Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Joshi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Yashpal Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This instant bail application has been filed for releasing the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 434 of 2016, under Section 354A IPC and Section 8 of POCSO Act, P.S. Shivli, District Kanpur Dehat, during pendency of trial.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that earlier the applicant was granted bail by the trial court vide order dated 28.01.2017. Subsequently, he remained absent w.e.f. 20.02.2017 to 18.11.2019 and as a result thereof, N.B.W was issued and he was arrested. The explanation given by the applicant that he is a labour and has gone another place for doing work for earning his livelihood and in the meantime, he neither talk to his counsel nor he received any information about warrant issued against him and therefore, he could not appear before the court below. It has been further submitted that applicant is in jail since 17.11.2019 having no other previous criminal history to his credit and that in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial and thus, the applicant is entitled for indulgence.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

Having considered the material on record, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another , reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant- Rajharsh Singh involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-

¶10

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶11

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶12

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶13

In case the applicant has been enlarged on short term bail as per the order of committee constituted under the orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court his bail shall be effective after the period of short term bail comes to an end.

¶14

The applicant shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored.

¶15

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

¶16

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.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶18

Order Date :- 3.12.2020 Noman

Rajharsh Singh v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajharsh Singh v. State of U.P.

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

Rakesh @ Pappu Vs State of U.P.

Sauhil Vs State of U.P.

Anil Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Pradeep Vs State of U.P.

Gaje Singh Vs State of U.P.

Amar Singh Vs State of U.P.