Allowed

Ritesh @ Vikas v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC10 Nov 2022BAIL/41133/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Court granted bail to the applicant in a criminal case involving POCSO and IPC offences. The court imposed strict conditions including personal bonds, undertaking against adjournments, and requirement for prompt trial conclusion, without commenting on substantive merits.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on personal bond and two sureties each, subject to strict conditions of attendance and no adjournments.

Ritesh @ Vikas Vs State of U.P. — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 76

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41133 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Ritesh @ Vikas Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Prakash Misra,Arvind Prabodh Dubey,Ashok Kumar Giri Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶5

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

¶6

The applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 270 of 2018, under Sections 363 366, 376 IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, 2012, P.S. Nebuwa Naurangiya, District Kushinagar.

¶7

As per prosecution story, applicant is said to have enticed away the minor daughter of the informant.

¶8

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 submitted that the victim in her statement said to have been recorded under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. has not supported the case of the prosecution and she had stated that she had gone with the applicant out of her own sweet will. The victim in her statement said to have been recorded under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. has not levelled any allegations of rape or abduction against the applicant. She denied the fact that applicant committed rape with her. The victim has refused her medical examination and as per medical examination report the age of the victim is 17 years. The applicant is in jail since 12.03.2019 and has no criminal history. Charge-sheet has been filed and conclusion of trial will take time, hence it is prayed that the applicant be released on bail.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant further contended that first informant and the prosecutrix have turned hostile and have not corroborated the prosecution story. On these grounds, learned counsel for the applicant has prayed for grant of bail.

¶10

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

¶11

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.

¶12

Let the applicant- Ritesh @ Vikas, 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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

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

¶19

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.

¶20

Order Date :- 10.11.2022

¶21

RavindraKSingh

¶22

Digitally signed by RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.11.10 16:51:19 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ritesh @ Vikas v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ritesh @ Vikas v. State of U.P.

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

Shailesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt. Nisso Vs State of U.P.

Surjeet Singh Vs State of U.P.

Suresh @ Paupi Vs State of U.P.

Urmila Devi Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Giri Vs State of U.P.