Allowed

Sajjan v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC21 Dec 2022BAIL/35612/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail application of Sajjan accused under Sections 377, 506 IPC and POCSO Act for allegedly molesting an adult. The court noted the FIR contained no time specifics, the medical report did not support allegations of injury, and no witnesses corroborated the charge.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below.

Sajjan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35612 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sajjan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Rajesh Dwivedi, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shashi Shekhar Tiwari, the learned Additional Government Advocate and perused the record.

¶6

Notice of the present bail application has been issued to the informant by means of an order dated 07.09.2022 passed by this Court. The office has reported that the notice has been served but no one has put in appearance on behalf of the informant to oppose the prayer for grant of bail.

¶7

The instant application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 218 of 2022, under Sections 377, 506 IPC, Section 5/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station Akbarpur, District Kanpur Dehat during pendency of the trial in the Court below.

¶8

The aforesaid case has been registered on the basis of an F.I.R. lodged on 24.03.2022, stating that about 4 to 5 days prior to lodging of the F.I.R., the applicant had taken the informant's nephew to a tubewell for bathing. Somehow the informant came to know that the applicant has molested the informant's nephew.

¶9

In the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It has been stated in the affidavit that the applicant had done some labour work in the informant's house who is an Advocate and when the applicant demanded his remuneration, the informant has falsely implicated him in the present case. It has further been stated in the affidavit that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in jail since 26.03.2022.

¶10

A rejoinder affidavit has been filed on behalf of the applicant annexing therewith a copy of the medico legal examination report of the victim, as per which, no injury has been found on his body. No sign of anal tear has been found.

¶11

Per contra, the learned Additional Government Advocate has opposed the prayer for grant of bail.

¶12

Having considered the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the fact that the F.I.R. mentions that the alleged incident occurred about 4 to 5 days ago and there is no specific mention of the time of the incident; that the medico legal examination of the victim does not support the F.I.R. allegation and that although the victim has mentioned a presence of some other persons also on the place of occurrence but they have not come forward to support the F.I.R. allegation, coupled with the fact that the applicant has no criminal history, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶13

In light of the preceding discussion and without making any observation on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed .

¶14

Let the applicant Sajjan be released on bail in Case Crime No. 218 of 2022, under Sections 377, 506 IPC, Section 5/6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station Akbarpur, District Kanpur Dehat on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below, subject to the following conditions:-

¶15

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶16

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶17

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶18

(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.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move an application before this Court seeking cancellation of the bail.

¶20

Order Date :- 21.12.2022

¶21

Jaswant

¶22

Digitally signed by JASWANT KUMAR Date: 2022.12.22 11:32:39 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sajjan v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sajjan 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

Mohd Yaseen@ Raju Vs State of U.P.

Mohammad Salim Vs State of U.P.

Manoj Vs State of U.P.

Shahrukh Vs State of U.P.

Shiv Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Rakesh Vs State of U.P.