Allowed

Sumit v. State of U.P. though Principal Secretary (Home) and 3 others

Allahabad HC24 May 2022BAIL/11147/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application under Cr. Misc. No. 11147 of 2022, the Allahabad High Court granted enlargement on bail to Sumit, who faced charges under IPC sections 452, 354B, 376, 506 and PCPOCSO section 3. The Court addressed arguments regarding inconsistent victim statements and claims of consent before imposing strict conditions to secure the applicant's presence.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with a personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions of presence, no tampering, and immediate reporting to the trial court.

Sumit Vs State of U.P. though Principal… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 44

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11147 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sumit

¶4

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Though Principal Secretary (Home) And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

¶6

Learned AGA states that notice on the informant as also Child Welfare Committee of the instant bail application has been served. None otherwise is present on their behalf.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶8

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 266 of 2021, under Sections 452, 354B, 376, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3, 4 Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station New Mandi, District Muzaffar Nagar.

¶9

As per the FIR allegation, the daughter of the informant is aged 16 years and while the mother had gone out for her work the applicant entered the house and started outraging the modesty of the victim. On raising noise others came and the applicant fled. The informant has also been informed that about two months back when the victim was alone she was raped by the accused applicant. Statement of the victim has been recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., in which plea of rape about two months back is taken without specifying the date and time. Admittedly, no complaint in that regard was made by then. Brother of the accused applicant has also been added in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and it is claimed that on 14.6.2021 applicant alongwith his brother tried to commit rape.

¶10

Counsel for the applicant states that the statement of victim is inconsistent and there are material changes in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. from what was alleged in Section 161 Cr.P.C. It is also stated that the victim was herself a consenting party and the rumour of her affair with the applicant was well known and has also been recorded in the case diary by the Investigating OfÏcer. It is lastly argued that the applicant is in jail since 17.6.2021 and the trial is not likely to conclude shortly and that the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the conduct of trial.

¶11

Learned AGA opposes the bail application but facts as have

¶12

been urged on behalf of the applicant are not seriously disputed.

¶13

Having considered the respective submissions advanced; perused the materials placed on record; considering the plea that the statement of victim is inconsistent and is a consenting party, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail, at this stage. Above observations made in the bail order shall, however, not be construed as expression of opinion, on the merits, at the stage of trial.

¶14

Let the applicant - Sumit involved in aforesaid case 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, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶15

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶16

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶17

(iii) 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.

¶18

(iv) 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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

(v) 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.

¶20

(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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 sufÏcient 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.

¶21

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be

¶22

verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶23

Accordingly, the present bail application is allowed.

¶24

Order Date :- 24.5.2022 Ranjeet Sahu

¶25

Digitally signed by RANJEET SAHU Date: 2022.05.25 15:34:53 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sumit v. State of U.P. though Principal Secretary (Home) and 3 others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sumit v. State of U.P. though Principal Secretary (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

Mahmood Ali Alias Mahmood Khan Vs State of U.P.

Satyaveer Vs State of U.P.

Saifurheman @ Rehman Vs State of U.P.

Govind @ Chhotu Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rakesh Vs State of U.P.

Javed Alias Bablu Vs State of U.P.