Allowed

Panne Lal Gond v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC2 Nov 2021BAIL/29645/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed bail to applicant Panne Lal Gond in a trial case involving offences under IPC and POCSO Act. Court held that medical report indicates victim was 18+, suggesting consensual relationship, thus applicant made out a case for bail.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by personal bond and two sureties after restoration of normal court functioning with specific conditions imposed.

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

¶1

Court No. - 67

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29645 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Panne Lal Gond Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rampyare Lal Srivastava,Subash Chandra Srivastava

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Himanshu Srivastava

¶5

Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri R.P.L. Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶7

By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no.21 of 2021, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act, Police Station-Hanumanganj, District-Kushinagar is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

¶8

Submission made by learned counsel for the applicant is that as per the FIR lodged by one Umesh Kushwaha on 20.02.2021 under Section 363 IPC against the applicant Panne Lal with the allegation that on 19.02.2021 around nine in the morning the victim ( aged about 15 years) was enticed away by the applicant and since then her whereabouts are not known. Contention raised by the counsel that the girl was eventually recovered on 23.02.2021. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the victim was remained in the company of the applicant for 4-5 days and thereafter she was produced before the Magistrate for recording her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C.

¶9

I have perused the 164 Cr.P.C. statement of the girl in which she has stated that on her own she has joined the company of the applicant and visited to Ludhiyana and other places, where they have crossed the limits and established physical relationship. As per the medical, the age of the victim is 18+ years, her conduct clearly indicates that she was in consensual relationship with the applicant as she has spent quality time of 4-5 days with the applicant and visited numerous placed like Ludhiyana and other places. The applicant is languishing in jail since 23.02.2021.

¶10

Learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.

¶12

Let the applicant- Panne Lal Gond be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶13

(i) THE APPLICANT/APPLICANTS SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE/THEY SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE FIXED FOR

¶14

EVIDENCE WHEN THE WITNESSES IS/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.

¶15

(ii) THE APPLICANT/APPLICANTS SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS/HER/THEIR COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIS/HER/THEIR UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.

¶16

(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT/APPLICANTS MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HER PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANT/APPLICANTS FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HIS/HER/THEIR, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.

¶17

(iv) THE APPLICANT/APPLICANTS 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/APPLICANTS IS/ARE 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 HIS/HER/THEIR IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.

¶18

(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/APPLICANTS.

¶19

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

¶20

Since the bail application has been decided under extra-ordinary circumstances, thus in the interest of justice following additional conditions are being imposed just to facilitate the applicant/applicants to be released on bail forthwith. Needless to mention that these additional conditions are imposed to cope with emergent condition-:

¶21

The applicant/applicants shall be enlarged on bail on execution of personal bond without sureties till normal functioning of the courts is/are restored. The accused will furnish sureties to the satisfaction of the court below within a month after normal functioning of the courts are restored.

¶22

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

¶23

The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the

¶24

counsel of the party concerned.

¶25

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.

¶26

Order Date :- 2.11.2021

¶27

Abhishek Sri.

Panne Lal Gond v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Panne Lal Gond 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

Omprakash @ Guddu Vs State of U.P.

Shailesh Sahani Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramu Vs State of U.P.

Chaudhary Danish @ Kala Vs State of U.P.

Vijay Tomar Vs State of U.P.

Prabhawati Devi and Another Vs State of U.P.