Allowed

Priyanshu Gaur @ Pisu v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC2 Dec 2022BAIL/22449/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed the bail application of Priyanshu Gaur accused under POCSO and IPC sections, accepting arguments of consensual relationship and lack of evidence against him, granting bail subject to strict conditions regarding court attendance.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on personal bond and two local sureties subject to conditions regarding court attendance and no adjournment seeking during evidence.

Priyanshu Gaur @ Pisu Vs State of U.P. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 22449 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Priyanshu Gaur @ Pisu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Kamlesh Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

As per office report dated 25.11.2022 notice has been duly served to the informant.

¶6

Heard Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the present bail application. None appears on behalf of informant inspite of service of notice.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant Priyanshu Gaur @ Pisu with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 38 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and Section 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station-Bhudkuda, DistrictGhazipur, during pendency of trial.

¶8

As per the prosecution case, an FIR has been lodged by the father of the victim under section 363 IPC against unknown persons alleging therein that his 15 year old daughter(Date of Birth 10.10.2007), who was student of Class 9th did not return from school on 02.03.2022.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. After recovery of the victim, her statements under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. were recorded in which she has not said anything against the applicant. He further submits that in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has stated that she went out of her own free will travelled several places like Banaras and Mumbai alongwith the applicant. She has further stated that she has established physical relationship with applicant out of her own sweet will, she knew the applicant since last two years.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that from the aforesaid, it is clear that relations between the two is consensual. As per her date of birth she has nearly 15 years old and applicant is also nearly 19 years old, is a student of Class

¶11

12th. He further submits that the purpose of POCSO Act, is to save minor child from sexual exploitation and not to criminalize consensual romantic relationship between them. He further submits that the applicant is also a student and his detention in jail for a longer period will ruin his life, therefore, keeping in mind age of the applicant, consensual relationship between them and being student, the applicant may be released on bail. He further submits that the applicant has no criminal history and there is no possibility of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and the applicant is languishing in jail since 06..03.2022. Accordingly, he requests for bail.

¶12

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that as per date of birth victim is minor and the crime is heinous in nature, however could not dispute the fact that the victim has not been sexually exploited.

¶13

Considering the nature of the offence, material/evidence brought on record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed .

¶14

Let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

¶15

(i) 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 and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶16

(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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

(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. is issued and the applicants fail 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.

¶18

(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 him in accordance with law.

¶19

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶20

Order Date :- 2.12.2022 Arti

¶21

Digitally signed by ARTI SHARMA Date: 2022.12.03 15:56:27 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Priyanshu Gaur @ Pisu v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Priyanshu Gaur @ Pisu 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

Krishna Kumar Shukla Vs State of U.P.

Umesh Bhartiya @ Anna Vs State of U.P.

Manish Vs State of Uttar Pradesh

Praveen Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pankaj Joshi Vs State of U.P.

Devendra Sachan @ Chhotu Vs State of U.P.