Allowed

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

Allahabad HC21 Dec 2022BAIL/36196/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the bail application filed by Yogesh in a crime involving Sections 114 IPC and 4/18 POCSO. The court held that the applicant had made out a case for bail, emphasizing the larger mandate of Article 21.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to specific conditions including not tampering with witnesses and cooperating in the trial.

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

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36196 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Yogesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Vipin Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant Yogesh with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.368 of 2021, under Section 114 I.P.C. & 4/18 POCSO Act, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Etah during pendency of the trial.

¶7

Initially FIR was lodged under sections 354 kha, 452, 376, 511 I.P.C. and Section 8 POCSO Act and the applicant moved bail application in aforesaid sections and he was granted bail by order dated 16.07.2022. Learned counsel for the applicant next argued that Court has taken cognizance under section 114 I.P.C. and 4/18 POCSO Act. The facts of the case and witnesses are not changed and applicant has earlier granted bail. There is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future due to heavy dockets. The applicant is not a previous convict. The applicant is languishing in jail since 08.04.2022 and in case he is enlarged on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant.

¶9

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, evidence, complicity of accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 , the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant, Yogesh, who is involved in the aforesaid 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

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶12

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶13

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶14

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶15

Order Date :- 21.12.2022 SKD

¶16

Digitally signed by SURJIT KUMAR DEY Date: 2022.12.22 12:31:17 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yogesh 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prince Vs State of U.P.

Vinod Kumar Sharma Vs State of U.P.

Nitesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Prince Gill Vs State of U.P.

Anash Vs State of U.P.

Suhail Vs State of U.P.