Allowed

Mithun Yadav v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC2 Mar 2023BAIL/10289/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Hon'ble Court allowed bail to the applicant in a case involving abduction, gang rape conspiracy, and rape under POCSO and IPC sections, citing fundamental rights to speedy trial and jail overcrowding without expressing an opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to strict conditions including verification of whereabouts and ensuring attendance at trial.

Mithun Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10289 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Mithun Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Pravina Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

Learned AGA has informant that notice on opposite party no.2 has been served but no one has turned up to oppose this bail application.

¶7

There is allegation against the applicant of abduction, gang rape and hatching conspiracy with common intention and implication under Section 5/6 of POCSO Act has also been made.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C has admitted that she knows the applicant. He was residing opposite to her house. She has not made allegation of gang rape against the applicant. She has only alleged that the applicant tried to commit offence of rape against her in the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. He has torn her clothes and when her father came he ran away. The victim is clearly a consenting party because her father came at the wrong time, she has falsely implicated the applicant. Applicant is in jail since 18.08.2022 and has no criminal history.

¶9

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above submissions.

¶10

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials 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.

¶11

Let the applicant, Mithun Yadav, involved in Case Crime No.2101 of 2016, under Sections 363, 366, 376D, 120B/ 34 I.P.C and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Sahibabad, District- Ghaziabad 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 not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶13

(ii) 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.

¶14

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail 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.

¶16

(v) 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 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.

¶17

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.

¶18

Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶19

Order Date :- 2.3.2023 SS

¶20

Digitally signed by :- SURENDAR SINGH NARANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mithun Yadav v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mithun Yadav 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

Shekhar Vs State of U.P.

Rohit Vs State of U.P.

Sonu Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Abdul Vs State of U.P.

Sudheer Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sukhdev @ Sukhvindra @ Sukkha Vs State of U.P.