Allowed

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

Allahabad HC21 Dec 2022BAIL/27838/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 27838 of 2022, the Allahabad High Court granted bail to Bhupendra, an applicant accused of offences under IPC and POCSO Act. The Court cited contradictions in victim statements and lack of medical injuries as factors, following Data Ram, and imposed strict conditions including appearance in court and trial conclusion within one year.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions including appearance in court for evidence, framing of charges, and Section 313 Cr.P.C. statement.

Bhupendra Vs State of U.P.and 3 Others — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 76 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27838 of 2022 Applicant :- Bhupendra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sarvesh Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶3

Learned AGA has apprised to the Court that notice issued to the informant has been served, but nobody has turned up.

¶4

Heard Mr. Sarvesh Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the material available on record.

¶5

By means of this application, the applicant is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial in Case Crime No.273 of 2021, under Sections 363, 366, 368, 376, 323, 506 IPC and Section 5L/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Saurikh, District Kannauj.

¶6

The contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has never committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. As per education certificate, the victim is aged about 16 years whereas as per medical report, the victim was found aged about 18 years. As per medical report, no injury has been found on the body of the victim. Further contention is that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she has not levelled any allegation of rape against the applicant even in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the victim has not implicated the application. Further contention is that in the second statement, while developing the victim has alleged the applicant for the alleged offence. There are material contradictions in her statement. No alleged offence is made out against the applicant. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. Lastly, it is argued that the applicant is languishing in jail since 26.08.2021 having no previous criminal history.

¶7

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail, but could not controvert the submissions made by the

¶8

learned counsel for the applicant.

¶9

Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, submission of learned counsel for the parties, considering the law laid down in the case of Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2018 (3), SCC, 2 but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.

¶10

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

¶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 for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

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

¶17

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.

¶18

Order Date :- 21.12.2022/Ajeet

¶19

Digitally signed by AJEET KUMAR PATEL Date: 2022.12.21 16:58:29 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhupendra 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amjad Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vikas Vs State of U.P.

Rohit Dubey Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ruksad Vs State of U.P.

Rohit Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Neeraj Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others