Allowed

Preetam Pal v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC26 Feb 2020BAIL/8044/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single judge allowed bail to the applicant Preetam Pal implicated in offences under Sections 354, 323 IPC and POCSO Act, directing him to furnish a personal bond and heavy sureties subject to standard bail conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two heavy suretics each, subject to court satisfaction, with provisions for verification of sureties.

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

¶1

Court No. - 78 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8044 of 2020 Applicant :- Preetam Pal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

¶3

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

¶4

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has not committed the present offence. Applicant was implicated in this case due to village rivalry. Offences levelled against the applicant are not attracted in the present matter. No offence as alleged in the FIR ever took place. The applicant has no criminal history. He is languishing in jail since 27.01.2020 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶5

On the other hand, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail.

¶6

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, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶7

Let the applicant Preetam Pal involved in Case Crime No. 744 of 2019, under Sections 354, 323 IPC and Section 7/8 POCSO Act, P.S. Kotwali Dehat, District - Saharanpur be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy 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.

¶8

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶9

The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶10

The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶11

The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶12

The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶13

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶14

Order Date :- 26.2.2020

¶15

Sanjeet

Preetam Pal v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Preetam Pal 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

Parvej Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Dharmendra Kumar Saroj @ Dharmendra Kumar Kantaprasad Saroj Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Jagdish Prasad Dwivedi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rakesh Vs State of U.P.

Soel Vs State of U.P.

Jaipal Vs State of U.P.