Allowed

Rahul Kumar v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC21 Sept 2022BAIL/11783/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal, J. granted bail to the applicant Rahul Kumar in a criminal case involving offences under IPC and POCSO, finding it to be a fit case based on the applicant's submission of innocence and contradictions in the victim's statement, subject to specific court conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant be released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties, subject to specific undertakings regarding court attendance and conduct.

Rahul Kumar Vs State of U.P. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11783 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rahul Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Harish Chandra Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Santosh Kumar Yadav

¶4

Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Santosh Kumar Yadav learned counsel for the informant-opposite party as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.0175 of 2021 under Sections 354 (ga), 354, 501, 506, 509 IPC and Section 7/8 POCSO Act and 67 B of I.T. Act, IPC, Police Station- Husainganj , District - Fatehpur .

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present crime due to political rivalry of village pradhan election; It is submitted that there were major contradiction between the statements of the victim recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr P C; no injury was found on the body of the victim; the victim had fall in love with the applicant; the applicant has no previous criminal history. It is also submitted that there is no apprehension that after being released on bail, applicant may flee from the course of law or may, otherwise, misuse the liberty of bail and the applicant is in jail since 17.11.2021 and the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is very bleak.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has, however, opposed the prayer for grant of bail.

¶9

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

¶10

Let applicant namely Rahul Kumar be released on bail in the aforesaid Case Crime Number on his/her furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following

¶11

conditions:-

¶12

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that applicant 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/her counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against applicant under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

(iii) In case, the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure presence of the applicant, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against the applicant, 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 the applicant in accordance with law.

¶16

Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.

¶17

Order Date :- 21.9.2022 Rahul Dwivedi/-

¶18

(Piyush Agrawal, J.)

¶19

Digitally signed by RAHUL DWIVEDI Date: 2022.09.21 16:11:38 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rahul Kumar v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Kumar 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Kasir Vs State of U.P.

Amar Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Bilal Vs State of U.P.

Arif Ali Vs State of U.P.

Pratik Rastogi Vs State of U.P.

Ankit Pandey Vs State of U.P.