Court allowed bail in a bail application where applicant, accused of rape and abduction, alleged false implication and inconsistencies in victim statements. Considering jail crowding, court granted bail with conditions.
Applicant released on bail via personal bond and two sureties with conditions against tampering or influencing witnesses.
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. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38223 of 2020 Applicant :- Aman Soni @ Ravi Soni Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Prakash Pandey,Sanjay Srivastava,Shailendra Kumar Dwivedi,Swati Agrawal Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
Heard Sri Chandra Prakash Pandey and Smt. Swati Agrawal Srivastava, learned counsels for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.
A first information report was lodged against the applicant as Case Crime No. 559 of 2017 at Police Station- Phoolpur, District Allahabad under Sections 363, 366 IPC.
The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Additional District & Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Allahabad, on 21.09.2020.
The applicant is in jail since 31.05.2020, pursuant to the said F.I.R.
Smt. Swati Agrawal Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the applicant is a major and is 19 years of age. The medical report attests the aforesaid fact. There are material contradictions in the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and Section 164 Cr.P.C. as well as the statement given by the victim before the doctor. These inconsistencies discredit the prosecution case. The FIR is a result of relationship gone awry. The applicant did not make any promise to marry the victim during their relationship. The threat of criminal
prosecution is being used to force the applicant to marry the victim. The victim travelled to various places with the applicant including Maihar (Madhya Pradesh), Surat (Gujrat) and thereafter to Mumbai. She did not raise any alarm. The victim did not resist the applicant. She was clearly a consenting party. The medical opinion does not corroborate any rape or forceful assault. Apart from the instant case the applicant does not have any criminal history. Lastly it is submitted by learned counsel for applicant that the applicant shall not abscond, and will fully cooperate in the criminal law proceedings. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence nor influence the witnesses in any manner.
Sri I.P. Srivastava, learned AGA for the State could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record. Learned AGA for the State does not contest that the applicant does not has any criminal history as disclosed in the bail application.
Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of jails during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020, Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India) . These circumstances shall also be factored in while considering bail applications on behalf of accused persons.
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- Aman Soni @ Ravi Soni be released on bail in Case
Crime No. 559 of 2017 at Police Station- Phoolpur, District Allahabad under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, on his 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 :- 22.2.2022 Pravin
Digitally signed by PRAVIN VERMA Date: 2022.02.23 18:26:43 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail considering inconsistencies in victim statements and jail overcrowding.
Whether the applicant can be released on bail under Section 363, 366, 376 IPC and POCSO Act.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Contagion of COVID 19 Virus in prisonsReferred¶11
Suo Motu Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020
Aman Soni
Ajay Bhanot
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
