Allowed

Rambabu v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Mar 2021BAIL/9777/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Cr.M. 9777 of 2021, the High Court of Allahabad enlarged the applicant, Rambabu, on bail in a case under Section 354Ka IPC and POCSO Act, imposing standard conditions regarding witness tampering, trial attendance, and cooperation with the court.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was enlarged on bail by executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Rambabu Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 69

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9777 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Rambabu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Virendra Singh,Sarvesh Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is aged about 20 years and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to village party bandi as he is son of erstwhile Village Pradhan. By the perusal of statement of victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. as well as Section 164 Cr.P.C. (produced by learned AGA), it is apparent that it is a case of false implication. In her statement, she stated that after catching her, she has been pulled away into pigeon pea ( Arhar) field by the applicant and started doing wrong, thereafter she started shouting. There is no occasion for the victim to wait upto reaching into pigeon pea ( Arhar) field without shouting. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit and is languishing in jail since 17.01.2021. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶8

Considering the material on record as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, let the applicant- Rambabu , involved in Case Crime No. 16 of 2021, under Section- 354Ka I.P.C. and 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station- Chopan, District Sonbhadra, be enlarged on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

¶9

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

¶10

This bail order would be subject to the fulfilment of following conditions:-

¶11

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

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

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 Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code;

¶15

In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 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

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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶17

In case the applicant has been enlarged on short term bail as per the order of committee constituted under the orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court his bail shall be effective after the period of short term bail comes to an end.

¶18

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

¶19

Order Date :- 18.3.2021

¶20

Arvind

Rambabu v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rambabu 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

Taseem Vs State of U.P.

Akhlakh Vs State of U.P.

Rizwan @ Bhoora Vs State of U.P.

Kusuma Devi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Himalay Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Prashant Kumar Vs State of U.P.