Allowed

Rohit Kumar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC3 Nov 2022BAIL/30039/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order grants bail to an applicant falsely implicated in offences under IPC 363 and POCSO. The court imposes strict conditions including personal bonds, ensuring presence at trial stages, and prohibition of seeking adjournments. It clarifies that the order does not reflect on the case's merits.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail with a personal bond and two local sureties subject to strict conditions regarding presence and conduct during trial.

Rohit Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 58

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30039 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rohit Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Dhirendra Kumar Agrahari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.

¶5

As per office report dated 26.09.2022, notice has been served upon the informant, but no one is present on his behalf.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.

¶7

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Rohit Kumar with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 457 of 2022, under Sections 363 I.P.C. and Section 11/12 POCSO Act, Police Station- Khurja Nagar, DistrictBulandshahr, during the pendency of the trial.

¶8

Prosecution case in brief is that the daughter of the complainant namely Nisha aged about 14 years and daughter of the brotherin-law of the complainant namely Anjali aged about 15 years have been disappeared on 07.05.2022 at about 04.30 p.m..

¶9

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that the applicant is not named in the FIR. The name of the applicant has been surfaced in the statement of victim recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. It is also submitted that there is no independent eye witness of the alleged incident and entire witnesses are family members of the informant. It is stated by the counsel for the applicant that there is contradiction in the statements of victim as well as informant. It is further submitted that the applicant has no concerned with the alleged incident. It is further submitted that co-accused Lalit and Smt. Shalni have been granted bail by the coordinate Benches of this Court vide orders dated 20.07.2022 and 12.09.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application Nos. 27210 of 2022 and 36371 of 2022 and the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. It is next contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 26.05.2022.

¶10

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but he could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

Considering the nature of the offence, provision for initiation of cases and release of the accused, material/evidence brought on record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment as well as the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, 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:-

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(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.

¶16

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.

¶17

Order Date :- 3.11.2022 SK Srivastava

¶18

Digitally signed by SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.11.04 11:29:29 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rohit Kumar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohit Kumar 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

Mohshin Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Afjal Vs State of U.P.

Arshad Vs State of U.P.

Suraj Lodhi Vs State of U.P.

Dharmdas Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others