Allowed

Atul Kumar Prajapti v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC25 Nov 2022BAIL/47761/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Sections 363, 366, 376, 120-B IPC and POCSO Act, the High Court allowed bail to the applicant despite the severity of the allegations. The court imposed strict conditions regarding court attendance and trial conclusion within one year, emphasizing that the bail grant does not prejudge the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to strict conditions of court attendance and trial conduct.

Atul Kumar Prajapti Vs State of U.P. and 3… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 76 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47761 of 2022

¶2

Applicant :- Atul Kumar Prajapti Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Murli Dhar Yadav,Sapan Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶3

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

¶4

Dr Abida Sayed, Advocate appearing on behalf of respondent no. 4 has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of respondent no. 4 without welfare ticket as the same is not being made available hence the same may be accepted without welfare ticket. Her Vakalatnama is accepted.

¶5

The applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 87 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376,120-B IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, 2012, P.S. Barsathi, District Jaunpur.

¶6

As per prosecution story, applicant along with other co accused persons are said to have enticed away the minor daughter of the informant in the night of 3/4-06-2022.

¶7

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 and lived with the applicant as husband and wife for considerable period after solemnized marriage. It is further stated that the victim in her statement under Section 161 & 164 Cr.P.C has admitted her aged as 18 years. The applicant is in jail since 31.08.2022 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.

¶8

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

¶9

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,

¶10

will not affect the trial of the case.

¶11

Let the applicant- Atul Kumar Prajapati, 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.

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

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

¶18

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.

¶19

Order Date :- 25.11.2022/RavindraKSingh

¶20

Digitally signed by RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.11.25 16:50:23 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Atul Kumar Prajapti v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Atul Kumar Prajapti 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Haleem Vs State of U.P.

Amrish Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sagar Giri Vs State of U.P.

Dharmendra Kumar Sonkar Vs State of U.P.

Aman Kumar Kashyap Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Kumar Vs State of U.P.