Allowed

Naved v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC10 Dec 2020BAIL/36828/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court granted bail to the applicant in a POCSO and IPC case involving abduction and sexual assault. The applicant must furnish a personal bond and two sureties and adhere to strict conditions regarding court appearances and witness interference.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of like amount, subject to specific conditions regarding court attendance and non-interference with witnesses.

Naved 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. - 36828 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Naved Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ali Zamin,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available 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.207 of 2020, under Sections 366, 376(2) (Jha) I.P.C. and 3Ka/4 POCSO Act 2012, Police Station Bhopa, District Muzaffar Nagar.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to the FIR version on 29.6.2020 at about 07:00 p.m. victims aged about 17 & 16 years went missing. It is also submitted that in her statements recorded u/s 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. she has stated that she went to Punjab along with applicant and she knows him for 2-3 years and she wants to live with him after nikah . It is further submitted that as per CMO report, age of the victim has been ascertained 18 to 19 years and no injury has been found. 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 30.7.2020.

¶8

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer by contending that, as per FIR, victim was minor at the time of incident, therefore, he does not deserve any benevolence.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, as per CMO report age of the victim and statements of the victim, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- 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 :-

¶10

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence and

¶11

pressurize the witnesses during trial.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶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 :- 10.12.2020

¶19

m.a.

Naved v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naved 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Salim Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vineet @ Sumit Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Pappu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Suraj Ahirwar Vs State of U.P.

Sher Bahadur Saroj Vs State of U.P.

Saibood Vs State of U.P.