Allowed

Udhav v. State of U. P. and Another

Allahabad HC21 Oct 2021BAIL/23917/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a bail application for an accused charged under IPC sections 363, 366, 376, 506 and the POCSO Act. Relying on the reformative theory and Article 21, the court granted bail despite serious charges, noting the applicant's lack of prior criminal history.

What did the court decide?

Ordering the applicant to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to standard conditions of attending trial and not tampering with witnesses.

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

¶1

Court No. - 79 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23917 of 2021 Applicant :- Udhav Opposite Party :- State Of U. P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Rajiv Joshi,J.

¶3

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

¶4

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.580 of 2019, under Sections 363, 366, 376, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Khoda, District Ghaziabad during the pendency of trial.

¶5

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. As per F.I.R., which was lodged against unknown person by the informant (father of the victim) to the effect that her daughter (victim) was kidnapped by someone, subsequently, during investigation the police recorded the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and, thereafter, her statement was recorded before the Magistrate under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in which she alleged that she had gone with the applicant and the applicant used to force her and committed rape on several occasions.

¶6

During trial the statements of the informant, P.W.01 as well as the victim P.W.02 were recorded in which she stated that whatever she had stated before the Magistrate in her statements under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was on the influence of the police, in fact nothing wrong has been done by the applicant. The statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. are quoted as under:-

¶7

C No-75/20

¶8

ब्ययान पपी०डब्ललू० 2 स/उ्ቍव 24.08.21 363/366/376/506 आई०पपी०सपी० थयानया-खखोडया

¶9

नयाम सयाकपी- कक० ननशया पकतपी ल्ቤन ससिሺह उ्቞ 14 वरर पपेशया पढ़तपी हहूሺ। ननवयासपी -710, शिሺकर नवहयार, खखोडया कयालखोनपी , गया०बयाद नपे शपथ पर ब्ययान नकयया नक - नदनयािሺक 17/12/20 कखो मम अपनपे पयापया ककी डयािሺट सपे नयारयाज हखोकर चलपी गयपी थपी और उसकपे बयाद मम ककछ नदनखो बयाद अपनपे घर ललौट आयपी थपी।गवयाह नपे पतयावलपी पर मलौजलूद इन्दयाज सिሺ०-10 क 1 कखो दपेखकर कहया नक पकसलस वयालखो नपे एक सफपेद कयागज पर

¶10

दस्तख्त करया सलयपे थपे उन्हखोनपे उसकपे बयाद क्यया सलखया नहीሻ बतया सकतपी। पकसलस वयालखो नपे मपेरया डयाक्टरपी मकआयनया भपी करयायया थया। और मसजस्ट ट पे कपे सयामनपे सपे जयाकर मपेरपे ब्ययान भपी अिሺनकत करयायपे थपे। ममनपे पकसलस वयालखो कपे कहनपे पर भय व डर कपे कयारण उ्ቍव कपे नवरू्ቍ बययान दपे नदयया थया सत्य यह हहै नक उ्ቍव नपे मपेरपे सयाथ कभपी कखोई गलत कयाम नहीሻ नकयया थया। न्ययाययालय ककी अनकमनत सपे सलफयाफया मक०अ०सिሺ० - 519/19, धयारया-363/366/376 आई०पपी०सपी० व ¾ पखोक्सखो एक्ट थयानया खखोडया खखोलया गयया सजसमम सपे पपीनडत कपे ब्ययान 164 सपी०आर०पपी०सपी० ननकलपे। ब्ययान पर चस्पया अपनपी फखोटखो व हस्तयाकर कखो तसदपीक करतपे हहए गवयाह नपे कहया नक यह वहपी ब्ययान हहै जखो ममनपे मसजस्ट ट पे सयाहब कपे सयामनपे पकसलस कपे दबयाव मम और डर कपे चलतपे नदयपे थपे। मम नहीሻ बतया सकतपी नक वह उ्ቍव कखो झलूठपे कपेस मम क्यखो फिሺसयानया चयाहतपे हहै। मम हयासजर अदयालत मकललजम उ्ቍव कपे सयाथ नया तखो कहपी गयपी थपी और नया हपी मपेरया उसकपे सयाथ नववयाह हहआ।उ्ቍव नपे नया तखो कखोई फखोन नकयया थया और नया हपी मपेरपे नयानया नयानपी कखो मरवयानपे ककी धमककी दपी हहै।गवयाह नपे अपनपे हस्तयाकर व फखोटखो तसदपीक नकयपे। व्ययान 164 सपी०आर०पपी०सपी० पर ्ቚदशर क-2 डयालया गयया।उस स्तर पर गवयाह कखो पकदखोहपी घखोनरत कर अनभयखोजन कपे ्ቚयाथरनया पर सजरह ककी अनकपलस्थनत ्ቚदयान ककी गयपी।

¶11

सजरह ओर सपे अनभयखोजन गवयाह कखो उसकपे धयारया 161 सपी०आर०पपी०सपी० पढकर सकनयायया गयया तखो उसनपे कहया नक पकसलस नपे मपेरया ऐसया कखोई ब्ययान नहीሻ सलयया अगर सलख नदयया हहै तखो मम उसककी कखोई वजह नहीሻ बतया सकतपी।उन्हखोनपे मपेरपे मनया करनपे कपे बयावजलूद 2-4 कयागजखो पर मपेरपे दस्तख्त करया सलए। यह कहनया गलत हहै नक मम नकसपी भय दबयाव यया नकसपी लयालच कपे कयारण उ्ቍव कखो बचयानपे कपे सलयपे आज न्ययाययालय मम झलूठ बखोल रहपी हहूሺ।

¶12

सजरह ओर सपे बचयाव पक- उ्ቍव नपे मपेरया बलयात्कयार नहीሻ नकयया और न हपी मपेरपी उससपे शयादपी हहई।

¶13

टलू कखोटर-1- क्यया आप न्ययाययालय मम आज सच बखोल रहपी हहै? उ्ቈर- जपी हहॉ।्ቚ

¶14

श्न-2- आप नकसकपे सयाथ न्ययाययालय आयपी हहै?

¶15

उ्ቈर- मम्मपी, पयापया कपे सयाथ।्ቚ

¶16

श्न-3- आपकखो डरयायया धमकयायया तखो नहीሻ गयया हहै?

¶17

उ्ቈर- जपी नहीሻ।

¶18

यह ब्ययान मपेरपे बखोलनपे सकनकर तसदपीक नकयया।

¶19

पर रपीडर दयारया अिሺनकत नकयया

¶20

गयया।

¶21

It is further contended that since both the informant and victim have been declared hostile and they have been cross-examined by the prosecution nothing came out against the applicant. Lastly it is contended that the applicant is in jail since 06.01.2020 having no criminal history to his credit as stated in paragraph no.18 of the affidavit filed along with the bail application and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶22

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶23

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, 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 larger 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 merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶24

Let the applicant, Udhav involved in aforesaid 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.

¶25

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

¶26

He will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶27

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

¶28

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶29

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.

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

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

¶33

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.

¶34

Order Date :- 21.10.2021

¶35

S.P.

¶36

Digitally signed by Justice Rajiv Joshi Date: 2021.10.21 17:13:59 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Udhav v. State of U. P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Udhav 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nipendra and another Vs State of up

Rajneesh Kumar and Another Vs State of Up

Ajay Patel Vs State of U.P.

Jitendra @ Juta Vs State of U.P.

Chhanga @ Akbar Vs State of U.P.

Rajendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another