Allowed

Ram Singh @ Kallu v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC20 May 2022BAIL/20128/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed a bail application filed by Ram Singh @ Kallu in a POCSO and IPC case involving enticement. The court granted bail considering the alleged matrimonial relationship, lack of criminal history, and length of trial, imposing strict conditions regarding court attendance and conduct.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with specific conditions including attendance at trial and non-interference with witnesses.

Ram Singh @ Kallu Vs State of U.P. and 3… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 44

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20128 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Ram Singh @ Kallu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Lakshman Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

¶5

Learned AGA makes a statement that the informant and Child Welfare Committee have been served notice of this bail application.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vinay Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the informant and learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 284 of 2021, under Section 363, 366, 376(3) I.P.C. and Section 3/4 (2) of POCSO Act, Police Station Pataherwa, District Kushinagar.

¶8

As per the FIR version, daughter of informant aged 16-17 years has been enticed by the accused-applicant (Ram Singh @ Kallu) and she is not traceable since 6:00 p.m. of 23rd October, 2021. The victim is also stated to have taken jewellery and Rs.22000/- with her. Necessary action was, therefore, prayed for in the matter.

¶9

The victim has subsequently been traced and her statements have been recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., as per which, she knew the accused-applicant for last 2-1/2 years and used to contact on phone. It is also alleged that accused-applicant took the victim to Orai and then to Delhi, Jaipur, Jalaun, Surat etc. It has also been stated that victim was living as husband and wife with the accused-applicant and marriage was also solemnized between them.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant with reference to above material states that victim is a consenting party to physical relations and have also solemnized marriage and, therefore, allegations made in the FIR are incorrect. It has also been stated that in the medical opinion, age of the victim has been found to be 17 years and if a period of two years is counted for, on account of any error, she

¶11

ought to be treated as a major. Argument is that having travelled voluntarily, all the way from Jalaun to Delhi to Jaipur to Surat, the inescapable conclusion is that, the victim has joined the company of accused willingly and is a consenting party. It is also urged that applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 22.11.2021 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.

¶12

Learned AGA opposes the bail application but facts as have 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 fact that the applicant has no criminal history, victim was living as husband and wife with the accused-applicant and marriage was solemnized between them, the applicant is in jail over six months and trial is not likely to conclude shortly, he 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 - Ram Singh @ Kallu 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

¶18

and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶19

(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 sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶20

(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.

¶21

(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 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.

¶22

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be 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 :- 20.5.2022/Ashutosh

¶25

Digitally signed by ASHUTOSH SINGH Date: 2022.05.21 14:14:13 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ram Singh @ Kallu v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Singh @ Kallu 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

Sonu Alias Rajesh Dwivedi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Saeed Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Chukkha Vs State of U.P.

Kamlawati Devi Vs State of U.P.

Jitendra Vs State of U.P.

Vikash Rajpoot Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others