Allowed

Sudhar Singh @ Tejbhan Singh v. State of U.P through Secretary Home and 3 Others

Allahabad HC12 May 2022BAIL/5232/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was allowed for an applicant charged with rape under POCSO and IPC. The court noted the victim's alleged admission of prior relationship and lack of independent witnesses. Bail was granted subject to a personal bond, sureties, and strict conditions regarding court attendance and non-harassment.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount, subject to specific conditions of attendance and non-interference.

Sudhar Singh @ Tejbhan Singh Vs State of U.P through… — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 44

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5232 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sudhar Singh @ Tejbhan Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Through Secretary Home And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Bahadur Singh,P.K. Singh,Shyam Sunder Mishra

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Ashwani Kumar Mishra,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Shyam Sunder Mishra and Sri J. B. Singh, learned counsels for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

Learned AGA states that notice upon the victim has already been served on 15.12.2021. The bail application is accordingly taken up for hearing. None, however, has appeared on her behalf or behalf of Child Welfare Committee.

¶8

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 338 of 2021, under Sections 376, 506 IPC and 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Khaga, District Fatehpur.

¶9

As per the prosecution version the victim aged about 15 years had gone to attend nature call in the agricultural field where the applicant Sudhar Singh was already present and he committed offence of rape upon the victim and also threatened her of dire consequences.

¶10

Counsel for the applicant submits that though the age of victim is alleged to be 15 years in the FIR but in the medical examination she has been found to be 19 years. It is also submitted that in the statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. the victim has stated that she had voluntarily gone to meet the applicant in the night and she has consented to physical relations with the applicant. It is also stated that victim has been meeting the applicant for the last two and a half year and she is willing to marry the applicant. It is urged that even before the doctor similar statement has been made by the victim and no injury is otherwise found on the victim. Submission is that subsequent contra statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. is under family pressure and cannot be relied upon. It is further argued that the applicant is in jail since 13.10.2021 and the trial is not likely to conclude shortly and that the applicant undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the

¶11

conduct of trial.

¶12

Learned AGA opposes the bail application but facts as have been urged on behalf of the applicant are not seriously disputed.

¶13

Having considered the respective submissions advanced; perused the materials placed on record; considering the fact that the victim in her statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. and before the doctor has admitted her relationship with the applicant; there is no independent eye witness to the incident; the applicant has no criminal history, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail, at this stage. Above observations made in the bail order shall, however, not be construed as expression of opinion, on the merits, at the stage of trial.

¶14

Let the applicant - Sudhar Singh @ Tejbhan Singh involved in aforesaid 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, with the following conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶15

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶16

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶17

(iii) 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.

¶18

(iv) 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.

¶19

(v) 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.

¶20

(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the 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.

¶21

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶22

Accordingly, the present bail application is allowed.

¶23

Order Date :- 12.5.2022 Ashok Kr.

¶24

Digitally signed by ASHOK KUMAR Date: 2022.05.16 17:31:55 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sudhar Singh @ Tejbhan Singh v. State of U.P through Secretary Home and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudhar Singh @ Tejbhan Singh v. State of U.P through Secretary Home and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nakul Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Subhash Vs State of U.P.

Sunny Vs State of U.P.

Mohammad Naim @ Madde Vs State of U.P.

Vidya Devi Vs State of U.P.

Sanjay Vs State of U.P.