Allowed

Naresh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC22 Dec 2021BAIL/30884/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge granted bail to Naresh in a criminal investigation involving attempts under IPC 354-A, 504, and POCSO. Court noted family presence during alleged attempt, making improbability, and ordered release on bond with conditions for trial participation and restrictions on adjournments and witness intimidation.

What did the court decide?

Released on personal bond and two sureties subject to undertaking not to seek adjournments, remain present at trial, and refrain from intimidating witnesses.

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

¶1

Court No. - 51

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30884 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Naresh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Pati Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Suneet Kumar,J.

¶5

Despite notice, no one has appeared on behalf of the first informant.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 253 of 2021, under Sections 354-A, 504 IPC and Section 7/8 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered at Police Station Shivli, District Kanpur Dehat, during pendency of trial.

¶8

It is urged that applicant is languishing in jail since 30.05.2021, having no criminal antecedent; State counsel informs that charge sheet has already been filed. It is urged that applicant has been falsely implicated; other members of the family are present in the house and it is alleged that in their presence, offence was attempted to have been committed, which appears to be improbable. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him.

¶9

Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail, however, does not dispute the fact.

¶10

After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶11

Let the applicant- Naresh , 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:-

¶12

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

¶13

(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

¶14

Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(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. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

(iv) 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 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.

¶17

However, It is made clear that in case the applicants indulge in intimidating or threatening any witness, the State or Prosecutor would be at liberty to file an application for cancellation of bail.

¶18

Order Date :- 22.12.2021 Mukesh Kr.

Naresh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naresh 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

Anwar Alias Annu Vs State of U.P.

Ankur Vs State of U.P.

Umesh Chandra Vs State of U.P.

Rizwan Vs State of U.P.

Akram Vs State of U.P.

Pankaj Jatav Vs State of U.P.