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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Bail granted to applicant Lalita on execution of a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with conditions to attend and co-operate with trial proceedings, not tamper with witnesses, and not indulge in illegal activities during the bail period; breach of conditions to be a ground for cancellation of bail; trial court directed to expedite the trial.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Lalita, involved in Case Crime No. 127 of 2019 under Sections 363, 366, 342, 506 IPC and Section 5g/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Myorpur, District Sonbhadra, should be released on bail.

Court's answer

Considering the nature of accusation, severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, the large mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of the Apex Court in Dataram Singh v. State of U.P., and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court found it to be a case of bail.

Ratio / Principle

The applicant Lalita was ordered to be released on bail on her executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to conditions: attendance and co-operation in trial proceedings, no tampering with witnesses, no indulgence in illegal activities during the bail period, with breach of any condition being a ground for cancellation of bail.

Key takeaways

The trial court was directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same as expeditiously as possible, keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in Alakh Alok Srivastava v. Union of India, if there is no legal impediment.ratio¶16
Observations, if any, made in the order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.obiter¶17

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court, Allahabad (Vivek Kumar Singh, J.) allowed the bail application of Lalita, in custody since 17.11.2019 with no other criminal history, in Case Crime No. 127 of 2019 under Sections 363, 366, 342, 506 IPC and Section 5g/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Myorpur, District Sonbhadra. Considering the nature of accusation, severity of punishment, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, the large mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and the dictum of the Apex Court in Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, (2018) 2 SCC 22, and without expressing any opinion on the merits, the Court found it a case of bail. Bail was granted on a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to conditions of attending and co-operating with the trial, not tampering with witnesses, and not indulging in illegal activities, breach of any condition being a ground for cancellation. The trial court was directed to expedite the trial keeping in view Alakh Alok Srivastava v. Union of India and others, AIR 2018 SC 2440, if there is no legal impediment. Observations were expressly confined to the disposal of the bail application.

Court No. - 76

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6231 of 2020

Applicant :- Lalita Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Devendra Vikram Singh,Ashutosh Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shiv Kant Mishra

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

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

The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated due to previous enmity. It is next submitted that there is no specific allegation against the applicant. It is further submitted that there are various contradictions in the version of F.I.R. as well as statement of victim recorded u/s 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. Further submission is that applicant who is in jail since 17.11.2019, has no other criminal history and there is also no possibility of her either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. Applicant also undertakes that she will not misuse the liberty, if granted.

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

Considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and large mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

Let the applicant- Lalita, involved in Case Crime No. 127 of 2019 under Sections 363, 366, 342, 506 I.P.C. and Section 5g/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Myorpur, District- Sonbhadra be released on bail, on her executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions :-

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

She will not tamper with the witnesses.

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

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

The concerned Court shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court, Allahabad.

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

The trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same as expeditiously as possible, keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Alakh Alok Srivastava v. Union of India and others reported in AIR 2018 SC 2440, if there is no legal impediment.

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

Order Date :- 1.9.2020 KS