Allowed

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

Allahabad HC21 Dec 2022BAIL/26833/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was allowed for the applicant facing trial for offences under IPC Sections 363, 366, 368, 376 and POCSO Act. The High Court, relying on the court below and discrepancies in the prosecution evidence, granted bail with specific conditions ensuring the applicant's presence and prohibiting misconduct.

What did the court decide?

Bail allowed; applicant released on personal bond and two local sureties, subject to conditions regarding attendance, no adjournments, and prohibitions on tampering with evidence.

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

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26833 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Atul Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Prakash Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Niklank Kumar Jain

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

The case is taken up in the revised list.

¶6

Heard Mr. Chandra Prakash Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Niklank Kumar Jain, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant– Atul with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.85 of 2021, under Sections 363, 366, 368, 376 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station-Bagwala, District-Etah, during pendency of trial.

¶8

As per the prosecution case, the FIR has been lodged by the mother of the victim with the allegations that her 16 years old daughter was enticed away by the applicant with the help and assistance of mother of the applicant. It has also been alleged that the victim took away jewellery and some money alongwith her.

¶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. He further submits that in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has not stated anything against the applicant. She is illiterate. She has only detailed about the applicant's mother forcing her to have sweet. As per the medical report, she is aged about 17-18 years old. He further submits that it is only in statement under statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and before the doctor, the victim has alleged about the commission of rape upon her by the applicant. There are variations in the statements under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. as well as the statement before the doctor, it appears that the victim is a consenting party as she has accepted the friendly relationship with the applicant. The fact that the victim took away jewellery and some money alongwith her while leaving the house also shows consensual relationship between the

¶10

applicant and the victim. The medical report of victim also does not corroborate with the prosecution version. 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 22.06.2021. Accordingly, he requests for bail.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

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.

¶13

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:-

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii)

¶18

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

It goes without saying that if the prosecution witnesses are not turning up deliberately, then the court below has all the powers to adopt all the coercive measures provided under the Code in order to procure the presence of the witnesses.

¶21

Office is directed to communicate the copy of this order forthwith to concerned court for necessary compliance.

¶22

Order Date :- 21.12.2022 Jitendra/-

¶23

Digitally signed by JITENDRA KUMAR YADAV Date: 2022.12.22 11:43:43 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Atul 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

Sachin Vs State of U.P.

Sagar Vs State of U.P.

Raju @ Ajay Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Soni Chaurasiya Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Shahi Vs State of U.P.

Virendra Kumar Vs State of U.P.