The High Court allowed bail to Angad Agrahari in a POCSO and IPC case regarding sexual assault. The court found it a fit case for bail, citing precedent and the bail status of a co-accused, despite the gravity of the charges.
Release of applicant on bail executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties.
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. - 84
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3051 of 2022
Applicant :- Angad Agrahari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Sharan Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Notice has been served upon the opposite parties but despite service of notice no one has put in appearance on their behalf.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.
This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Angad Agrahari in connection with Case Crime No.245 of 2020, under Sections 354B, 376-D I.P.C. and Section 7/8 and 5G/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Kolhui, district Mahrajanj.
The first information report of this incident was lodged by the complainant/alleged victim herself against two named persons including the applicant. It was alleged in the first information report that on 31.10.2020 at about 2:00 p.m. when the alleged victim along with her mother had gone for grazing of goats and when she went ahead from her mother then she was overpowered by the applicant and co-accused Arjun and they outraged the modesty of the alleged victim. It was further alleged that luckily aunt (Badi Maa) of the alleged victim reached at the spot and she saved the alleged victim from the clutches of the applicant and co-accused Arjun.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with the ulterior motive. He submitted that the alleged victim has not supported the prosecution version recorded before the trial court and therefore declared hostile and the mother of the alleged victim has not supported the prosecution version and also declared hostile. Considering above testimonies, there is no likelihood of conviction of the applicant. He submitted that coaccused Arjun has been admitted to the concession of bail by another Bench of this Court by order dated 28.03.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.7614 of 2021 and role assigned to applicant is similar to role of other co-accused, who has already been enlarged on bail. He claims parity. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 31.10.2020, hence he is entitled to be released on bail and he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail plea.
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 and also the fact that aforesaid co-accused Meharban has been admitted to the concession of bail by this Court, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.
Let the applicant Angad Agrahari involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses;
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court; iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission;
v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
Order Date :- 26.4.2022
R./
Digitally signed by RAJEEV KUMAR SACHDEVA Date: 2022.04.28 14:07:59 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the present case qualifies as a fit case for granting bail considering the nature of the offence and circumstances.
Whether parity can be granted to the applicant considering the bail granted to other co-accused.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and othersReferred¶11
Data Ram Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2018 (3), SCC, 2 · Who else cites this
Angad Agrahari
Ajit Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
