Allowed

Ajay Urf Dhiraj Shahu v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC23 Dec 2022BAIL/51693/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge allowed bail to the applicant, Ajay Urf Dhiraj Shahu, involved in kidnapping and POCSO charges. The Court relied on the parity principle with a co-accused granted bail previously and cited Article 21 and Dataram Singh. Bail was granted subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail via personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions regarding presence, non-interference with witnesses, and cooperation in trial.

Ajay Urf Dhiraj Shahu Vs State of U.P. and 3… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 93 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 51693 of

¶2

2022 Applicant :- Ajay Urf Dhiraj Shahu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Bipin Pal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shailesh Kumar Mishra

¶3

Hon'ble Surendra Singh-I,J.

¶4

Copy of bail order dated 13.12.2022 of co-accused, Virendra Pal Maurya, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 48233 of 2022 has been produced by the learned counsel for the applicant in the Court today which is taken on record.

¶5

Heard Sri Bipin Pal Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Laxman Prasad Prajapati, learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Shailesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the informant and perused the material on record.

¶6

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Ajay alias Dhiraj Shahu, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 218 of 2022, registered under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C. and Section 16/17 POCSO Act, Police Station- Shahbad, District- Rampur, during pendency of trial.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is also submitted that the applicant is not involved in the kidnapping of the minor daughter of the informant. It has also been submitted that the applicant was not named by the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. No role has been assigned to the applicant in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. It is further submitted that according to prosecution case, the applicant is the driver of the four-wheeler vehicle by which the coaccused, Mohd. Ujaib, carried the victim. It is further submitted that identically circumstanced co-accused, Virendra Pal Maurya, has been enlarged on bail by coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 13.12.2022 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 48233 of 2022. The case of the applicant stands on identical footing and the applicant is also entitled to bail on the ground of parity. The applicant is languishing in jail since 14.07.2022 and has no criminal history to his credit. In case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty.

¶8

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. However, he could not deny the submissions made on behalf of the applicant.

¶9

Considering the material/evidence brought on record, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the fact that identically circumstanced co-accused, Virendra Pal Maurya, has been enlarged on bail by coordinate Bench of this Court, larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, the Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.

¶10

The bail application, accordingly, stands allowed.

¶11

Let the applicant, Ajay alias Dhiraj Shahu , involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

¶12

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶13

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶14

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶15

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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229A of the Indian Penal Code;

¶16

In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 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.

¶17

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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶18

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

¶19

Order Date :- 23.12.2022/KS

¶20

Digitally signed by :- KISHAN SINHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ajay Urf Dhiraj Shahu v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Urf Dhiraj Shahu 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Sher Khan and Another Vs State of U.P.

Vindhyachal Singh Vs State of U.P. and Others

Mahendra Pal Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shiv Kumar and Another Vs Jaipal Singh and Others

Nisar Vs State of U.P. and Others

Vishal Alias Tittu Alias Alish Vs State of U.P.