Allowed

Pankaj v. State of U.P.and Another

Allahabad HC2 Mar 2022BAIL/47342/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single Bench Criminal Misc. Bail Application where the applicant, Pankaj, challenged his arrest under Sections 377 IPC and POCSO, alleging false implication due to election rivalry and lack of injury to the victim. The High Court allowed bail subject to strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions of not tampering with evidence or witnesses.

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

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47342 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Pankaj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Atmaram Nadiwal,Dinesh Kumar Yadav

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Chandra Sharma,J.

¶6

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

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to rivalry of election. F.I.R. was lodged after delay of two days having no explanation thereto. No any injury was found on the person of victim during medical examination. There is no criminal history against the applicant. He is languishing in jail since 31.8.2021 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶8

Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail.

¶9

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, 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 Pankaj involved in Case Crime No. 304 of 2021, under Section 377 I.P.C. & Section 5-D/6 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, P.S. Chilkana, District Saharanpur be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

¶11

The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶12

The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶13

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

¶14

The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶15

The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any 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 or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 2.3.2022 A. Singh

¶18

Digitally signed by ANURAG SINGH Date: 2022.03.04 15:51:50 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pankaj v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankaj 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shahukh Urf Bawla Vs State of U.P.

Faizan Vs State of U.P.

Updesh Vs State of U.P.

Shubham Vs State of U.P.

Sunil and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.

Ajeet Kumar Vs State of U.P.