Allowed

Jay Prakash Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC2 Nov 2022BAIL/27895/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court allowed a bail application in a POCSO and IPC case involving abduction and child related offences. After hearing counsel, the court found that a case for bail was made out based on the victim's statement without commenting on merits, granting release subject to conditions.

What did the court decide?

Released on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions against tampering, intimidation, and non-appearance.

Jay Prakash Singh Vs State of U.P. and 2… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 50

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 27895 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Jay Prakash Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Kumar Gupta,Raghawendra Singh

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.

¶6

Heard over bail application moved by applicant, Jay Prakash Singh, in Case Crime No. 63 of 2022, under Sections- 363, 366A, 504, 506 I.P.C. & 16/17 of POCSO Act, P.S. Dubhar, District- Ballia.

¶7

From the perusal of record, the prosecution case is that informant- Sonu Singh lodged the FIR at police station concerned on 7.4.2022 at about 12:55 hours, stating therein that his niece- victim, aged about 17 years was enticed and taken away by accused Jai Prakash Singh at about 6:00 A.M. and it is admitted by the informant that whereabouts of the victim could not be traced. During investigation, the victim was intercepted by police on her way to police station and her custody was entrusted to informant.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accusedapplicant is innocent; he has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number and is languishing in jail since 27.4.2022; he is of no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of fleeing from course of justice or tempering with evidence in case of release on bail; the age of the victim is around 17 years; on being recovered, the victim has refused herself to get medically examined; in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has stated that she left her home on being enticed by the sister of the applicant and no direct allegation for abduction is against the applicant; she has stated her age to be of 15 years before the Magistrate and stated that accused applicant was trying to force her for solemnizing marriage with her, abused her and threatened her; however, she has categorically stated that the accused had not done anything filthy with her. Hence, bail has been prayed for.

¶9

Notice has been served upon the informant but none appeared on his behalf till date.

¶10

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the bail application and

¶11

submitted that the victim was minor at the time of incident and as per her school leaving certificate, her age is around 14 years. However, in FIR her age is mentioned as 17 years by the informant. Although, learned A.G.A. opposed the bail application but could not controvert the factual submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering all above facts and circumstances, in particular, the statement of victim recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C., the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, but, without commenting on merits of the case, a case for bail is made out.

¶13

Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶14

Let the applicant, Jay Prakash Singh , involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties, each, in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:

¶15

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.

¶16

The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.

¶17

The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.

¶18

The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court, unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.

¶19

In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.

¶20

Order Date :- 2.11.2022 Kamarjahan

¶21

Digitally signed by KAMARJAHAN ANSARI Date: 2022.11.03 12:37:32 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jay Prakash Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jay Prakash Singh v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shanker vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow

Pravesh Gupta vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and 4 Others

Anil Chaudhary Vs State of U.P.

Naseem Vs State of U.P.

Rifakat Ansari Vs State of U.P.

Sehwaz Vs State of U.P.