Single Judge Court allowed bail to applicant accused under POCSO and SC/ST Act, relying on Dataram Singh. Bail conditioned on personal bond, sureties, and compliance with trial procedures.
Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount subject to specific conditions of bail.
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. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35336 of 2021
Applicant :- Muzafar Urf Pacchar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Irshad Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.0220 of 2021, registered under Sections 363, 366, 376D, 34 I.P.C. & 3/4 Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act & 3(2)(v) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station- Nawgawan Sadat, District-Amroha, during pendency of the trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. He next argued that alleged incident was occurred on 09.06.2021 at 20.00 p.m. and regarding that incident F.I.R. was lodged after delay of 3 days i.e. on 12.06.2021 at 00.30 p.m. against the applicant and co-accuse Hashim alias Nanhe Singh under Section 362 & 366 I.P.C. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that coaccused in the same case namely, Virendra & Hasim & Nanhe have already been enlarged on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 35567 of 2021 & Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 35851 of 2021, vide orders dated 11.11.2021 & 22.11.2021, respectively. There is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future due to heavy dockets. It is next submitted that there is no possibility of fleeing away of the applicant from the judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is also contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 19.06.2021.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer of the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and the statement of the victim under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C., medical report regarding age of the victim and evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused and the view laid
down by the Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant- Muzafar Urf Pacchar , who is involved in the aforesaid case crime, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified :-
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 17.12.2021 Sachin/-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant, accused of offences under POCSO and SC/ST Act with delays in FIR registration and dismissal on merits, is entitled to bail pending trial.
Whether the delay in lodging FIR and bail granted to co-accuseds warrants release of the applicant on bail.
Whether the applicant financier a personal bond and two local sureties to obtain bail under the conditions prescribed by this court.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and anotherReferred¶9
(2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Muzafar Urf Pacchar
State of U.P.
Deepak Verma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
