Allowed

Soran v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC23 Nov 2022BAIL/21658/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Cr. Misc. No. 21658 of 2022, the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, after hearing counsel and perusing the record regarding allegations of kidnapping, abduction, and rape, held it to be a fit case to grant bail subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to specific conditions regarding attendance and conduct during the trial.

Soran Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Narcotics (NDPS) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21658 of 2022 Applicant :- Soran Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Hardev Prajapati,Satish Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajeet Kumar Srivastava

¶3

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶4

Heard Mr hardev Prajapati and Mr Satish Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.Mr Pankaj Kumar Chaubey, Advocate holding brief of Mr Ajeet Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant is also present.

¶5

The applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 95 of 2021, under Sections 363, 366, 323, 376, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, 2012, P.S. Sikandarpur Vaishya, District Kasganj.

¶6

As per prosecution story, applicant along with co accused is said to have enticed away the minor daughter of the informant.

¶7

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the victim in her statement said to have been recorded under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. has not supported the case of the prosecution and she had stated that she had gone with the applicant out of her own sweet will. The victim in her statement said to have been recorded under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. has not levelled any allegations of rape or abduction against the applicant. She denied the fact that applicant committed rape with her. It is further submitted that from the conduct of the victim herself, it appears that she was a consenting party and stayed with the applicant for considerable period. The victim has been medically examined and her age is determined as 18-19 years. The applicant is in jail since 07.12.2021 and has no criminal history. Charge-sheet has been filed and conclusion of trial will take time, hence it is prayed that the applicant be released on bail.

¶8

Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant.

¶9

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail. However, any observation made herein-above, will not affect the trial of the case.

¶10

Let the applicant- Soran, who is involved in aforementioned 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶11

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open

¶12

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 counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

¶14

(iii) 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., may be issued and if 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 IPC.

¶15

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on 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.

¶16

(v) The Trial Court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial within a period of one year after the release of the applicant.

¶17

In case of breach of of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶18

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶19

Order Date :- 23.11.2022/RavindraKSingh

¶20

Digitally signed by RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.11.23 16:53:50 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Soran v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Soran 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

Jai Prakash Singh Chauhan Vs State of U.P.

Satendra Vs State of U.P.and 3 Others

Rajesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Smt Roshani Vs State of U.P.

Shankar Varik @ Vikram Vs Union Of India

Ripu Vs State of U.P. and Another