Application for bail filed under sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act. Court allowed bail subject to furnishing bond and sureties and complying with standard conditions regarding trial conduct and non-tampering.
Released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two local sureties in like amount subject to verification.
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. - 90
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40183 of 2020
Applicant :- Shiv Raj Singh @ Sonu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anubhav Shukla,Ram Shiromani Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant Shiv Raj Singh @ Sonu with a prayer to release him in Case Crime No.94 of 2020, under sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. & 3/4 POCSO Act, 2012, Police Station Kotwali Vindhyachal, District Mirzapur during pendency of the trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Applicant and victim are familiar with each other since last two years and when the family of the victim went to attend a marriage ceremony of their relative, the applicant enticed away the victim. The statements of the victim recorded under sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. are contradictory and not supporting the version of the FIR. In the statements recorded under sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C., there is no allegation of rape against the applicant. Victim in her statement deposed that she on her own sweet will absconded with the applicant and lived in district Sonbhadra. Learned counsel for the applicant next submitted that as per medical report, the victim is major. As per statements of the victim, no case is made out under sections 363, 366 & 376 I.P.C. There is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future due to heavy dockets. It is next submitted that there is no possibility of fleeing away of the applicant from the judicial custody 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 also contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 30.07.2020.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. oppose the bail prayer of the applicant.
Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case,
submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and the mandate laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018)3 SCC 22, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Shiv Raj Singh @ Sonu , who is involved in Case Crime No.94 of 2020, under sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. & 3/4 POCSO Act, 2012, Police Station Kotwali Vindhyachal, District Mirzapur, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
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.
Order Date :- 2.12.2020 SKD
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in case involving offences under sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act.
Whether the allegations in the medical report and victim statements support granting bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram SinghReferred¶11
Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018)3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Shiv Raj Singh @ Sonu
State of U.P.
Deepak Verma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
