Allowed

Raju Alias Raj Kishore v. State of U.P.Thru. Prin.Secy.Home and Others

Allahabad HC6 Dec 2022/2450/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge granted bail to the applicant in a POCSO and IPC case where witnesses of fact, including the prosecutrix, had already been examined and did not support the prosecution case. The applicant was directed to appear on fixed dates and not seek adjournments, with the court retaining powers to issue proclamation or proceed under specific IPC sections for absconding or abuse of bail.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties with conditions regarding attendance and appearance.

Raju Alias Raj Kishore Vs State of U.P.Thru… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 10

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2450 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Raju Alias Raj Kishore Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.Thru. Prin.Secy.Home And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶6

The present application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.358 of 2021, under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Mitauli, District Lakhimpur Kheri.

¶7

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that all the witnesses of fact, including the prosecutrix, have been examined and they have not supported the prosecution case. Accused-applicant has been in jail since 2.12.2021. He, therefore, submits that as the witnesses of fact have already been examined and they have not supported the prosecution case, there is no chance of the accused-applicant being convicted. Accused-applicant has no criminal history.

¶8

Sri Ashwani Kumar Singh, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but not disputed the fact that all the witnesses of fact have been examined and their evidence is brought on record and they have not supported the prosecution case.

¶9

Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, coupled with the contentions raised by the learned counsel for both sides, and without entering into the merit of the case, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶10

Let applicant Raju alias Raj Kishore be released on bail in the above case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond

¶11

and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶12

(i) 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. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶13

(ii) 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.

¶14

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

¶15

(iv) 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 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.

¶16

Order Date :- 6.12.2022 Rao/-

¶17

Digitally signed by CHEBROLU SRINIVASA RAO Date: 2022.12.06 17:58:06 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Raju Alias Raj Kishore v. State of U.P.Thru. Prin.Secy.Home and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raju Alias Raj Kishore v. State of U.P.Thru. Prin.Secy.Home and Others

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

Ankur Pandey S/O Sri Dinesh Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Aashu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Others

Devendra Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Vipin Sharma Vs Union of India through C.B.I.

Munni Lal Singh @ M.L. Singh Vs State of U.P. Thur. C.B.I.

Farhan Khan Vs State of U.P.Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Lko and Others