Allowed

Anuj Alias Anoop ( Second Bail) S/O Mandreek v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and 3 Others

Allahabad HC22 Dec 2022/4557/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a second bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the court discharged the accused charged with rape and POCSO offences, as the prosecutrix and complainant failed to appear for evidence despite warrants, hindering trial progress. Bail was granted subject to strict conditions regarding trial conduct and presence.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail upon furnishing personal bond and two sureties, subject to strict conditions regarding trial attendance and conduct.

Anuj Alias Anoop ( Second Bail) S/O Mandreek… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 10

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4557 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Anuj Alias Anoop ( Second Bail) S/O Mandreek Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Munni Lal Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Om Prakash Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This is the second bail application. First bail application got rejected by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 26.8.2021 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.6509 of 2020.

¶7

The present application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking bail in FIR/ Case Crime No.111 of 2020, under Sections 34, 376 IPC, Section 3/4 POCSO Act and Section 3(2) (V) SC/ST Act, Police Station Lonar, District Hardoi.

¶8

As per the allegation in the FIR, on 14.3.2020 at around 5 PM, when the prosecutrix, aged around 15 years, went to give mobile phone to Sonepur, the accused-applicant raped her.

¶9

This Court vide order dated 22.11.2022 asked the learned trial court to submit a report regarding the status of the trial. The trial court vide order dated 3.12.2022 has informed this Court that despite issuing the bailable warrants, neither the complainant nor the prosecutrix have turned up for giving their evidence. Accused-applicant has been in jail since 23.7.2021.

¶10

Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case and also the fact that the complainant and the prosecutrix themselves are not cooperating in early conclusion of the trial, it would be appropriate to enlarge the accused-applicant on bail.

¶11

Let applicant Anuj @ Anoop be released on bail in the above case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond 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 :- 22.12.2022 Rao/-

¶17

Digitally signed by :- CHEBROLU SRINIVASA RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Anuj Alias Anoop ( Second Bail) S/O Mandreek v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anuj Alias Anoop ( Second Bail) S/O Mandreek v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and 3 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

Rakesh Kumar Rawat S/O Kandhayi Rawat Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home

Ilyaas Vs State of U.P.

Salman Vs State of U.P.

Manju Devi W/O Budhi Sagar Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home

Arjun @ Shan Singh Vs State of U.P. through Principal Secretary Home, Civil Secretariat, Lucknow

Deepak Kumar S/O Sri Sharman Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and 3 Others