Allowed

Vicky Kumar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC18 Aug 2023BAIL/10568/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant in a FIR under sections 376, 354 IPC and POCSO Act, finding that the applicant had made out a case for bail without expressing an opinion on the merits of the criminal charges. Various conditions were prescribed.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted on personal bond and two heavy local sureties subject to conditions of presence and cooperation.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:166810

¶2

Court No. - 68

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10568 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Vicky Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Shiva Kant Srivastava,Chandrajeet,Pradeep Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶7

It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submits that the incident has been reported to have taken place on 25.07.2022 whereas, the F.I.R. has been registered on 02.11.2022 without there being any plausible explanation of such an inordinate delay of more than three months . Learned counsel furthere submits that in fact, the victim is a consenting party who not supported the prosecution version as per statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. He next submits that the victim is a consenting party and therefore, no offence against the applicant is made out. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon

¶8

him. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 04.11..2022 having no criminal history.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of evidence, and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Hence the bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let applicant Viccky Kumar involved in Case Crime No.598 of 2022 under Sections 376 (3), 354 9Kha) I.P.C., and Section 5m/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Khoda, District Ghaziabad, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶12

I. The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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.

¶13

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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶14

III. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 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.

¶15

IV. 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 18.8.2023 S.Ali

¶19

Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vicky Kumar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vicky Kumar 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mufeeda Vs State of U.P.

Rahmat Khan Vs State of U.P.

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

Tonu Pandey @ Devshankar Pandey Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Reeta Prakash Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sahidullah Vs State of U.P.