Single-judge High Court allowed bail to applicant accused of gang rape of a minor under POCSO and IPC sections, imposing strict conditions regarding court attendance and trial conclusion within two years.
Release of applicant on personal bond and two sureties with strict conditions to ensure presence and prevent tampering.
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. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2682 of 2022
Applicant :- Vishal Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ajeet Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vijay Kumar
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Vijay Kumar, learned counsel for the informant; learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Vishal Singh, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 230 of 2021, under Sections 376 DA, 323, 506 IPC and Section 5(g)/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Gadwar, District- Ballia, during pendency of trial.
There is allegation of gang rape of a minor girl against the applicant and co-accused, Akhand in the FIR.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that it is a case of false implication. The victim has been found below 18 years of age as per the report of C.M.O. However, given margin of one year on higher side, she can be considered to be major. Although the victim has made allegation of rape against the applicant, but the FIR is delayed by one day. In the medical report of the victim no single scratch has been found on her body, but even the offence alleged was committed in open field. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motives. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit and he is languishing in jail since 24.11.2021. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 , and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid 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 that :-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) 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.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) In case the applicant misuse 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.
(v) 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.
In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
The court below is directed to conclude the trial against the applicant, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two years.
Order Date :- 1.9.2022 Ruchi Agrahari
Digitally signed by RUCHI AGRAHARI Date: 2022.09.01 17:01:01 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in a case involving sexual offences against a minor with conditions to ensure presence and non-tampering.
Whether the Trial Court must conclude the trial expeditiously under Article 21 mandates.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & AnotherFollowed¶10
Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Vishal Singh
State Of U.P.
3 Others
Siddharth
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
