Sonu @ Pankaj Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 53

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 53993 of 2021

Applicant :- Sonu @ Pankaj Jaiswal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Indra Mohan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Santosh Kumar Tiwari

¶4

Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Indra Mohan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Santosh Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶6

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has not committed the present offence. No prima facie case is made out against the applicant. Victim was found aged about 18 years in the radiological report. As per high school certificate, she was aged about 17 years and 9 months. Nothing was stated by the victim in the statement under Sections 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. to attract the offence under Section 376 IPC. At no point of time, applicant enticed away the girl. She is major and had gone along with the applicant at her own free will. She is married and is pregnant and is also living in her matrimonial house. The applicant has no criminal history. He is languishing in jail since 30.07.2021 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.

¶7

On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and further argued that victim was minor at the time of offence. Consent given by her cannot be taken as free consent. To substantiate this argument, learned counsel for the informant referred to the date-of-birth disclosed in the high school certificate and further argued that a prima facie case is made out against the applicant.

¶8

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of offence, complicity of accused, scrutinizing the facts mentioned in the F.I.R., statement of victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the medical evidence 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.

¶9

Let the applicant Sonu @ Pankaj Jaiswal involved in Case Crime No. 63 of 2021, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and Section 5(j)II/6 of POCSO Act, P.S. Gauri Bazar, District - Deoria be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy 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.

¶10

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

¶11

The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶12

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

¶13

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.

¶14

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.

¶15

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

¶16

Order Date :- 7.2.2022

¶17

Sanjeet

Sonu @ Pankaj Jaiswal v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonu @ Pankaj Jaiswal v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Tejindar Kaur Bhullar Vs State of U.P.and Another

Vishal @ Gaurav Vs State of U.P.

Neeraj Kumar Vs State of U.P and 2 Others

Vishal Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Seema Shastri Vs State of U.P.

Munesh Devi Vs State of U.P.