Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad, J. allowed bail to the applicant, Pawan, charged with offences under Sections 354-B, 323, 504, 506 IPC and POCSO Act, subject to furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties along with specific conditions of bond.
Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of equivalent amount.
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. - 58
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34859 of 2022
Applicant :- Pawan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhanshu Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.
Heard Mr. Sudhanshu Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Vinod Kumar Singh Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-Pawan with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in C ase Crime No. 31 of 2022, under Sections 354-B, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. & 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station-Amrahat (Gohni), District-Kanpur Dehat, during the pendency of the trial.
The present first information report has been lodged by the informant (who is father of the victim herein) on 11th April, 2022 at about 21.30 hrs. against the applicant alleging therein that on 11th April, 2022 at 09.00 a.m. in the morning, when the daughter of the informant (victim) aged about 16 years went to General Store for purchasing some goods, the applicant was standing there and seeing the victim, he caught hold the victim and started molestation with bad intention. When the victim objected and started crying, the women of family members of the informant reached there and saw the incident. Seeing the family members of the victim, after beating the victim bitterly, the applicant ran away threatening to kill her.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the present first information report lodged by the informant is nothing but a bundle of lie and the same has been lodged only for exploiting the applicant by indulging his name in a fake, false and frivolous case. The entire prosecution story as unfolded in the first information report is absolutely a self-made story projected by the informant. It is further submitted that the real fact is that the applicant and the first informant are residing adjacent to each other and they are belonging to one family. Prior to the date of alleged incident, some quarrel took place between the applicant's family and the informant's family due to flow of drainage water. It is because of the aforesaid dispute, the informant annoyed and ultimately by showing a false case, he has implicated the applicant in the present case. It is further submitted that there is inconsistencies/contradictions in the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. It is only under the pressure of her parents, the victim has made allegations against the applicant. It is also submitted that in the medical examination report
of the victim, no visible injury was found on the body of the victim. It is impossible to believe that on a crowded place, the applicant has committed the alleged offence upon the victim and no one has arrived to save her. As per the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., her age is 16 years. The applicant has one criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one but in the said case he has been enlarged on bail (see paragraph-19 of the affidavit accompanying the present bail application). 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 14th May, 2022.
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.
Considering the nature of the offence, provision for initiation of cases and release the accused, material/evidence brought on record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Versus State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 , 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:-
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
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.
(Shiv Shanker Prasad, J.)
Order Date :- 2.11.2022 Sushil/-
Digitally signed by SUSHIL KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.11.04 11:15:13 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant be released on bail in a case involving offences under Sections 354-B, 323, 504, 506 IPC and POCSO Act.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh Versus State of U.P. and anotherApplied¶11
(2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
8 provisions across 3 enactments
Pawan
State Of U.P.
Shiv Shanker Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
