Allowed

Ram Kishan v. State of U.P and Another

Allahabad HC8 Dec 2021BAIL/40002/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge allowed the bail application of Ram Kishan, charged under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and POCSO. The court relied on the victim's statement lacking rape allegations, absence of injuries, and medical age verification, granting bail without expressing a view on merits while citing Dataram Singh.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail subject to personal bond, two local sureties, and conditions: no tampering, sincere cooperation, no new crime, and presence in trial.

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

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40002 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Ram Kishan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Awadhesh Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

At the very outset, learned AGA submits that notice to informant had been served regarding pendency and hearing of bail on 01.09.2021. In spite of notice, none appeared on behalf of informant.

¶6

Heard Sri Awadhesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 04 of 2021, registered under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, 2012, Police Station Milak, District Rampur during pendency of the trial.

¶8

As per FIR version, informant's minor daughter has been enticed away by the applicant.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. From the statement of victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., no allegation of rape is made out against the applicant. In statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., victim herself admitted that she left her parental home on her own sweet will as her parents were pressurizing her to marry with some other person. Victim has not made any allegation regarding physical relation. As per medical report, victim is major, aged about 18 years and no mark of injury found over the body of the victim. 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 07.01.2021.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer of the applicant.

¶11

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.

¶12

Let the applicant- Ram Kishan, 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 :-

¶13

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶14

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶15

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶16

The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed. 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

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

¶18

Order Date :- 8.12.2021 Nitin Verma

Ram Kishan v. State of U.P and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Kishan 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Nazim and Another Vs State of U.P.

Shankar Lal and 2 Other Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shiv Narayan and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.

Arjun Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kaseem Pasha Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Sakha Alias Sharma Vs State of U.P.