Allowed

Arvind v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC6 Sept 2023BAIL/10500/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed bail in a criminal appeal involving offences of abduction, rape, and POCSO. The court cited jail overcrowding and Article 21 rights, granting bail subject to strict conditions regarding court appearances and preventing witness tampering, while directing speedy trial.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions of appearance and non-tampering.

Arvind Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:176060

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10500 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Arvind Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Singh Bais,Abhilasha Singh,Rahul Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

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

¶7

There are allegations against the applicant of abduction of minor girl, commission of offence of rape and penetrative sexual assault in the FIR.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant submits that from the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she is clearly a consenting party. She has admitted having relationship with the applicant on phone. She eloped with the applicant and went to Noida and was living with him. When she came back to her village after more than one month she was caught by the police. From her arrest memo, it is clear that she was arrested at Gunnaur and not at Noida. Counsel for the applicant also submits that the statement of victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C is a tutored statement made against the applicant. He is in jail since 08.12.2022 and has criminal history of one case.

¶9

On the other hand learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶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; considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P

¶11

(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 ; 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.

¶12

Let the applicant, Arvind, involved in Case Crime No. 246 of 2022, under Sections- 363, 328, 376 IPC and 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Junawai, District- Sambhal, 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.

¶13

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

(iv) 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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

Trial court is directed to conclude the trial of the applicant as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of one year.

¶21

Registrar (compliance) is directed to communicate this order to the trial Court for necessary compliance within ten days.

¶22

Order Date :- 6.9.2023 Rohit

¶23

Digitally signed by :- ROHIT DAS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Arvind v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arvind 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

Shakil Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dinesh Kumar Tyagi Vs State of U.P.

Smt Preeti Vs State of U.P.

Gudiya Vs State of U.P.

Mukesh @ Bhairo Prasad @ Mikku Nishad Vs State of U.P.

Jang Bahadur Vs State of U.P.