Allowed

Prahlad v. State of U.P.and Another

Allahabad HC13 Sept 2021BAIL/21110/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 21110 of 2021, the court considered an application filed by Prahlad seeking bail in a case involving offenses under IPC Sections 363, 366, 120-B and POCSO Act. The court found it fit to grant bail subject to specific conditions regarding attendance and trial conduct, making clear that the bail order does not prejudice the trial court's independent opinion.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of presence and conduct.

Prahlad Vs State of U.P.and Another — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21110 of 2021 Applicant :- Prahlad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Pati Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vishveshwar Mani Tripathi

¶2

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶3

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State, Mr. Vishveshwar Mani Tripathi, learned counsel for the informant and perused the material available on record.

¶4

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.542 of 2020, under Sections 363, 366, 120-B IPC, and Section 16/17 POCSO Act, Police Station Bharthana, District Etawah.

¶5

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. The applicant is not named in the impugned first information report. The incident took place on 11.08.2020 whereas the first information report has been lodged on 03.10.2020 i.e. after two months of the alleged incident and no reason has been explained regarding delay. After two months, the victim was recovered and she has not levelled any serious allegations against the applicant in her statement recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. The victim has also stated in her statement that she solemnized marriage with co-accused Neelesh on 14.08.2021.He further submits that as per medical report, there is no internal or external injury found on the body of the victim. The applicant is having no criminal history and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 23.02.2021.

¶6

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant oppose the application for bail.

¶7

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

¶8

Let the applicant- Prahlad , who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two 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.

¶9

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

¶10

(ii) 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 IPC.

¶11

(iii) 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., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC.

¶12

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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.

¶13

(v) The Trial Court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial within a period of one year after the release of the applicant.

¶14

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

¶15

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶16

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

¶17

The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶18

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.

¶19

Order Date :- 13.9.2021/Ajeet

Prahlad v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prahlad 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

Devesh Vs State of U.P.

Taki Mohammad Vs State of U.P.

Sudhir Vs State of U.P.

Sangram Singh Vs State of U.P.

Sarwar khan Vs State of U.P.

Karan Taneja Vs State of U.P.