In a bail application under CrPC, the High Court granted bail to the accused charged with filming the rape of a child under IPC and POCSO, indicating a prima facie case for bail was made out.
Bail granted upon personal bond and two local sureties subject to conditions regarding attendance, no adjournments, and publicity rules.
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. - 10361 of 2021
Applicant :- Ram Autar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Suneel Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
This case has been taken up in revised call.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 260 of 2020 under Sections 376D, 506, 34 of IPC and Sections 5/6, 13, 1/17 the POCSO Act, Police Station - Amriya, District - Pilibhit with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.
The First Information Report of this incident was lodged by the complainant about the alleged rape of her daughter by co-accused Monu. It was alleged in the report that daughter of the complainant was taken by co-accused Chadani to the fields where co-accused Monu committed rape with her and the present accused applicant Ram Autar had made video clips of the said incident.
The contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant-accused has been falsely implicated in the present case. In support of the bail application further argument advanced by the learned counsel is that there is no recovery of the alleged video clips during the investigation by the police. He also submits that the incident is alleged to have taken place to months prior of the lodging of the First Information Report, thus, it is late by two months and there is no proper explanation furnished by the complainant in that regard. Lastly it is argued that the applicant is in jail since 7.10.2020 and that in case applicant is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. But he has not disputed the fact that main allegation of rape is against co-accused Monu and the allegation against the present accused Ram Autar is of shooting video clip of the alleged incident.
Keeping in view the submission of learned counsel for the parties, period of detention of the applicant and all the attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at this stage, prima facie, a case for bail has been made out.
The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.
Let applicant Ram Autar involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:-
(1). The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not
seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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;
(2). 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;
(3). In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 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 in such proclamation, then, the trial court may initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(4). 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the learned counsel for the applicant alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said persons (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.
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 :- 23.6.2021 LBY
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in a case involving rape and filming of the incident under POCSO and IPC.
Whether a prima facie case for bail is made out given the delay in lodging the FIR and lack of recovery of alleged video clips.
5 provisions across 3 enactments
Ram Autar
State Of U.P.
Ajit Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
