Single judge granted bail to the applicant in a criminal case involving enticement and alleged rape of a minor under IPC and POCSO, imposing standard conditions to ensure appearance and trial efficiency.
Released on bail upon furnishing personal bond and two sureties with specific undertakings to appear in court.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 76 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7318 of 2022 Applicant :- Umesh Rajbhar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Priya Ranjan Rai,Sunita Chauhan,Tanisha Jahangir Monir Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.
The applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 171 of 2021, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, 2012, P.S. Rani Ki Sarai, District Azamgarh.
As per prosecution story, applicant is said to have enticed away the minor daughter of the informant on 15.11.2021.
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 contended that the incident is said to have taken place on 15.11.2021 where the report was lodged on 24.11.2021 after gap of nine days without there being any explanation. It is further submitted that as per school certificate, age of the victim is 16 years. It is further submitted that as per medical report there is no sign of rape and further the victim in her statement said to have been recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. has stated she went with the applicant at different places and applicant is said to have committed rape upon her. It is further submitted that the as per medical examination report, no offence is made out against the applicant under Section 376 IPC. The applicant is in jail since 25.11.2021 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.
Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant.
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, will not affect the trial of the case.
Let the applicant- Umesh Rajbhar, 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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
(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.
In case of breach of of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
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.
Order Date :- 1.12.2022/RavindraKSingh
Digitally signed by RAVINDRA KUMAR SINGH Date: 2022.12.01 17:02:32 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is eligible for bail in a case involving Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and POCSO Act.
What conditions need to be imposed for the grant of bail.
Umesh Rajbhar
State Of U.P.
Shekhar Kumar Yadav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
