Allowed

Sanjay v. State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow and Ors.

Allahabad HC19 Oct 2022/1980/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad entertained a criminal bail application filed by an accused charged under the POCSO Act and IPC. The court found it to be a fit case for bail, granting release on personal bond with sureties and specific conditions to ensure presence in court and prevent tampering with evidence.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on personal bond and two sureties with conditions to remain present in court and not tamper with evidence.

Sanjay Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1980 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sanjay Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow And Ors. Counsel for Applicant :- Dilip Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Girijesh Kumar Dwivedi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

Instant bail application has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail during the trial in Case Crime No. 128 of 2021, under Sections 354B, 506 IPC and 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station- Maurawan, District Unnao.

¶7

As per the version of the first information report, the prosescutrix was molested by the present applicant.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the instant case. He next added that the prosecutrix as well as her mother in her statement in cross examination have stated that incident mentioned in the first information report is not true and that has been lodged on the instigation of others. He submits that in such view of the statement, story of the prosecution does not stand at any side. He added that the applicant has no previous criminal antecedent and he is languishing in jail since 23.06.2021 for his no fault. In case, he is granted bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and would cooperate in the trial proceedings.

¶9

On the other hand, learned A.G.A. for the State vehemently opposed the contention aforesaid and submits that the present applicant is involved in committing the aforesaid offence and as such he is not entitled to be released on bail.

¶10

Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of record, it is evident from the statement of prosecutrix and her mother in statement under cross examination before the trial court that they have denied

¶11

any kind of incident occurred as has been mentioned in the first information report; further there is no previous criminal antecedent of the applicant and he is languishing in jail since 23.06.2021.

¶12

Thus, considering the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and severity of punishment in case of conviction, nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment and without expressing any view on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail.

¶13

Let the applicant- Sanjay involved in the aforementioned crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with the following conditions:-

¶14

(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, or otherwise during the investigation or trial;

¶15

(2) 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. He 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;

¶16

(3) 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.; and

¶17

(4) 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, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

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.

¶19

It is clarified that the observations 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 merits of the case.

¶20

Order Date :- 19.10.2022 A.Kr*

¶21

Digitally signed by AJAY KUMAR Date: 2022.10.21 21:31:06 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sanjay v. State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay v. State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home Lucknow and Ors.

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

Mohd. Ajaz Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Smt. Gaytri Shukla Vs State of U..P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko.

Nitendra Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Pawan Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Dept. of Home Lko.

Kanhaiya Kaushal Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Amar Nath Dwivedi (in Person) Vs State of U.P. Thru Addl.Chief Secy./Prin.Secy. Basic Education Lucknow and Ors.