Allowed

Manoj and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC13 Sept 2021BAIL/9998/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court granted bail to applicants Manoj and Avadhesh accused under various IPC sections and POCSO Act, releasing them on personal bond and two sureties each amid pandemic jail concerns, without expressing views on case merits.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with specified conditions of attendance, non-tampering, and no illegal ac

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

¶1

Court No. - 71

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9998 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Manoj And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjive Kumar Gupta,Ashok Kumar,Bheshaj Puri Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Brajesh Kumar Solanki

¶4

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Bheshaj Puri, learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. They are innocent and have no criminal antecedent. Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that co-accused Ajay Singh has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 6.9.2021 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 9683 of 2021, thus the applicants herein are also entitled for bail. They are languishing in jail since 15.1.2021. They undertake that they will not misuse the liberty, if granted, therefore, they may be released on bail.

¶7

Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party vehemently opposed the prayer but could not dispute the factual aspect of the matter.

¶8

Courts have taken notice of overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020, Contagion of Covid 19 Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India). These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail applications on behalf of accused persons.

¶9

Having heard submissions of learned counsel of both sides, considering nature of accusation, severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, (2018) 3 SCC 22 , without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶10

Let the applicants- (i) Manoj and (ii) Avadhesh involved in

¶11

Case Crime No. 187 of 2020, under Sections 323, 452, 354, 504, 506, 509 IPC & Section 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station Ushanwa, District Budaun be released on bail, on their executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:

¶12

The applicants will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.

¶13

They will not tamper with the witnesses.

¶14

They will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.

¶15

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by the court concerned and in case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶16

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶20

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.

¶21

Order Date :- 13.9.2021 Digamber

Manoj and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manoj and Another v. State of U.P.

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

Arif Vs State of U.P.

Durga Prasad Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Manoj Verma Vs State of U.P.

Anupam Vs State of U.P.

Robin @ Mukesh Vs State of U.P.

Krishna Yadav Vs State of U.P.