The High Court allowed Criminal Misc. Bail Application, holding merit in submissions that the applicant was falsely implicated, the prosecution case was weak and contradictory, and medical evidence did not corroborate the allegations.
Allowed bail and directed release on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties with specific conditions.
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. - 70
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34251 of 2020
Applicant :- Abdul Khalid Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shobhit Dubey,Anant Ram Dube,Rakesh Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 150 of 2020 at Police Station Swar, District Rampur under Sections 376, IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act. The applicant is in jail since 22.07.2020.
The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Special Judge (POCSO Act)/Additional Sessions Judge, Rampur, on 14.08.2020.
Sri Rakesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant contend that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The prosecution case set out in the FIR alleges that the applicant forcibly held the victim and on her raising alarm the brothers of the victim who were close by rushed to the spot. The applicant tried to flee but was overpowered. No allegation of rape has been made in the FIR. However exaggerated and false statements were made by the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and Section 164 Cr.P.C. only to save the failing prosecution case. The aforesaid statements were made belatedly and were an after thought. Material contradictions in the FIR,
statements of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C and Section 164 Cr.P.C. discredit the prosecution case. Medical evidence does not corroborate rape or forceful assault of the victim. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case.
Shri Rishi Chaddha, learned AGA for the State could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Learned AGA does not contest the criminal history of the applicant as disclosed in the bail application.
I see merit in the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant and accordingly hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant- Abdul Khalid be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.
(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on
the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.
Order Date :- 19.7.2022 Pravin
Digitally signed by PRAVIN VERMA Date: 2022.07.19 16:07:14 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail in a POCSO case where the prosecution case appears weak.
Whether bail conditions can be imposed in the interest of justice.
Abdul Khalid
Ajay Bhanot
Pravin
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
