In this bail application, the High Court of Allahabad considered the release of the applicant charged with offences under IPC and POCSO. The court found the conduct heinous and denied bail, holding that incarceration was the right course.
Bail application rejected; applicant remain in custody.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16728 of 2022
Applicant :- Panku @ Upendra Yadav And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pulak Ganguly,Ravi Bhushan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
1.Heard Sri Pulak Ganguly, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Dinesh Kumar Srivastava, the learned Additional Government Advocate and perused the record.
2.The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 367 of 2021, under Sections 147, 323, 506, 325, 354 IPC and Section 7/8 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Kasimabad, District Ghazipur.
3.The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an FIR lodged against three named accused persons alleging that the applicants had beaten up the informant and his cousin with sticks and an iron rod and the reason of their beating was that the accused persons used to tease the minor niece of informant had advised the accused persons to mend their ways.
4.The injury report of the informant mentions several injuries suffered by him including a fracture in his elbow. Another person Shivam Singh has also received numerous injuries in the incident. The injury suffered by both the aforesaid persons have been caused by hard and blunt objects.
5.It has been averred in the affidavit filed in support of the bail application that the applicants are innocent, they have been falsely implicated in the case and they are in jail since 02.03.2022. It has also been stated in the affidavit that there is no possibility of the applicants tampering with any evidence and in such circumstances, the applicants are entitled for bail. It is also stated in the affidavit that the applicants will not misuse the liberty of bail and they will fully cooperate in the investigation.
6.In the statement of the informant's niece recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she categorically stated that some persons used to tease her while she used to go to and come from the coaching and this came in the informant's statement also. She
further stated that due to the aforesaid reason she had stopped attending coaching classes for some days. She told the informant about this and the informant tried to counsel the persons but on 08.12.2021, the accused persons had beaten up the informant and another maternal uncle of the victim causing injuries to both of the injured persons.
7.A supplementary affidavit has been filed in support of the bail application and a copy of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has been annexed with the same and the victim has reiterated her aforesaid version in that statement also. It has further been stated in the supplementary affidavit that the applicant no.1 has no criminal history.
8.In paragraph-19 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant no.2 is involved in another case bearing Case Crime No. 275 of 2019, under Section 147, 148, 323, 506 IPC, P.S. Kasimabad, District Ghazipur, in which he has been granted bail by means of an order dated 11.10.2019.
9.I have considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case. What prima facie appears from the version of the FIR and the statements of the informant's niece recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. is that the applicant used to tease and harass the minor niece of the informant on the way to her coaching classes and due to their fear she stopped attending the coaching classes for a few days. It further transpires that when the informant told about it to her maternal uncle, the informant tried to counsel the accused persons to mend their ways but this could not be tolerated by the accused persons and they assaulted the informant and his elder brother with sticks causing numerous injuries resulting in fracture to the aforesaid persons. The aforesaid conduct of the applicants is very heinous and detrimental to the interest of the society.
10.There appears to be no reasonable probability of any doubt regarding identity of the accused persons.
11.In Dataram Singh v. State of U.P., (2018) 3 SCC 22, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that:-
"A fundamental postulate of criminal jurisprudence is the presumption of innocence, meaning thereby that a person is believed to be innocent until found guilty. However, there are instances in our criminal law where a reverse onus has been placed on an accused with regard to some specific offences but that is another matter and does not detract from the fundamental postulate in respect of other offences. Yet another important facet of our criminal jurisprudence is that the grant of bail is the general rule and putting a person in jail or in a prison or in a correction home
(whichever expression one may wish to use) is an exception. Unfortunately, some of these basic principles appear to have been lost sight of with the result that more and more persons are being incarcerated and for longer periods. This does not do any good to our criminal jurisprudence or to our society.
2. There is no doubt that the grant or denial of bail is entirely the discretion of the judge considering a case but even so, the exercise of judicial discretion has been circumscribed by a large number of decisions rendered by this Court and by every High Court in the country. Yet, occasionally there is a necessity to introspect whether denying bail to an accused person is the right thing to do on the facts and in the circumstances of a case.
(Emphasis supplied)
Order Date :- 14.11.2022 Ashish Pd.
Digitally signed by ASHISH PRASAD Date: 2022.11.21 18:39:13 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to release on bail given the nature of the offence and heinous conduct.
Whether the facts and circumstances warrant granting bail under the established principles of criminal jurisprudence.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh v. State of U.P.Followed¶16
Dataram Singh v. State of U.P., (2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Panku @ Upendra Yadav
Another
State of U.P.
Subhash Vidyarthi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
