Allowed

Girdhari Lal v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC13 Oct 2022BAIL/4171/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants bail to Girdhari Lal in a POCSO case alleging false implication. The court applied the_Data Saara_ doctrine under Article 21 while imposing strict conditions to prevent abuse of liberty.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond with two sureties subject to conditions regarding court attendance and prohibition of adjournments.

Girdhari Lal Vs State of U.P. and Another — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4171 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Girdhari Lal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Singh,Swati Agrawal Srivastava

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

¶6

Supplementary-Affidavit has been filed and the same is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Ms. Swati Agrawal Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.

¶8

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is next contended that the alleged incident took place on 19.04.2019 and the F.I.R. was lodged on the next day i.e. on 20.04.2019. There is one day delay in lodging of F.I.R. Victim was 10 years' old on the date of occurrence. She has given tutored statement under threat and duress of police as well as father. On the spot, there was no hair, nail, semen or blood found nor there was any independent witness of the same. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 25.04.2019. It has been pointed out that the applicant has no criminal history.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.

¶10

Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another , reported in

¶11

(2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.

¶12

Let the applicant, Girdhari Lal involved in Case Crime No. 164 of 2019 under Sections 376 (2) (i), 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, 2012, Police Station Manjhanpur District Kaushambi be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions.

¶13

(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.

¶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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶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. 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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.

¶18

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶19

Order Date :- 13.10.2022 A. Mandhani

¶20

Digitally signed by ABHISHEK MANDHANI Date: 2022.10.14 13:07:32 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Girdhari Lal v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Girdhari Lal v. State of U.P. and Another

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

Smt. Vimla Devi Vs State of U.P.

Devendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Vishnu Prajapati Vs State of U.P.

Amar Verma @ Badal Verma Vs State of U.P.

Prabhat Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Sukhraji Devi Vs State of U.P.