Allowed

Chandan Yadav v. State of U.P and 3 Others

Allahabad HC11 Jul 2022BAIL/15255/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail to the applicant, who was accused of rape under IPC and POCSO Act. The court found merit in submissions noting a false implication and lack of medical evidence corroborating the allegations. Bail was granted subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Applicant to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in like amount.

Chandan Yadav Vs State of U.P and 3 Others — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 70

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 15255 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Chandan Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Piyush Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Shri Rajesh Mishra, learned brief holder for the State contends that the police authorities in compliance of the directions issued by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 46998 of 2020 (Junaid Vs State of U.P. and another) reported at 2021 (6) ADJ 511 and with a view to implement the provisions of POCSO Act, 2012 read with POCSO Rules, 2020, have served notices of the bail application upon the the victim as well as the CWC.

¶6

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.160 of 2021 at Police Station-Obara, DistrictSonebhadra under Section 376(3) of the IPC and Sections 3/4(2) of the POCSO Act and Sections 2/6 of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986 and Sections 3(2)5 of the SC/ST Act. The applicant is in jail since 17.01.2021.

¶7

The bail application of the applicant was rejected

¶8

by learned Additional Sessions Judge/learned Special Judge (POCSO Act), Sonebhadra on 16.12.2021.

¶9

Shri Piyush Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The victim in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has not made any allegation of rape, inappropriate behaviour or forceful assault against the applicant. The victim has further asserted that many villagers or busy bodies were spreading rumours that the victim is not of good character and she was scolded by her parents. She is not aware as to how a false case has been registered against the applicant. No medical evidence which corroborates rape or forceful assault has been produced by the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case.

¶10

Shri Rajesh Mishra, learned brief holder could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. He, however, does not dispute the fact that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case.

¶11

I see merit in the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and hold that the applicant

¶12

is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶13

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant-Chandan Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

¶15

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶16

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness. (iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶19

Order Date :- 11.7.2022 Ashish Tripathi

¶20

Digitally signed by ASHISH NAYAN TRIPATHI Date: 2022.07.12 13:57:12 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Chandan Yadav v. State of U.P and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandan Yadav v. State of U.P 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

Arjun Vs State of U.P.

Chameli Vs State of U.P.

Ravi Kumar Bind Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rahul Gupta Vs State of Up.

Nitin Vs State of U.P.

Sonu @ Awdhesh Vs State of U.P.