Allowed

Chandramani Sahini v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC9 Dec 2022BAIL/34832/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal bail application regarding a POCSO and IPC case, the High Court held it to be a fit case for bail. The court granted release contingent upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to strict conditions regarding attendance and trial conduct.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in like amount, subject to strict conditions of attendance and trial conduct.

Chandramani Sahini Vs State of U.P. and 3… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 76 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34832 of 2022

¶2

Applicant :- Chandramani Sahini Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Pandey,Sunil Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Syed Wajid Ali

¶3

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.

¶5

Present Bail Application has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to grant him bail in Case Crime No. 0235 of 2021, under Sections 363, 506, 504, 376 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station - Ahirauli Bazar, District - Kushi Nagar.

¶6

As per prosecution story, incident is said to have taken place on 08.12.2021 whereas F.I.R. was lodged on 22.12.2021 after a gap of about 12 days.

¶7

It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further contended that the victim is a consenting party. He next submitted that medical report does not support the prosecution version. He further submitted that as per the medical report, the age of the victim is 18 years at the time of incident. He further submitted that the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. she stated that she went along with the applicant and made physical relationship at her own free will. It is further submitted that the victim has herself refused her medical examination. The applicant is in jail since 25.06.2022 and has no criminal history. In case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial..

¶8

Per contra, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant.

¶9

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail. However, any observation made herein-above, will not affect the trial of the case.

¶10

Let the applicant- Chandramani Sahini , who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶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 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 :- 9.12.2022 Sanjeet

¶19

Digitally signed by SANJEET KUMAR YADAV Date: 2022.12.09 16:08:40 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Chandramani Sahini v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandramani Sahini 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

Dayasagar Vs State of U.P.

Pradeep Vs State of U.P.

Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Umesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Jaikishun Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Yagyapal @ Karua Vs State of U.P.