Allowed

Rajkumar Chauhan v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC7 Apr 2023BAIL/11335/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A criminal bail application by Rajkumar Chauhan an undertrial implicating charges under the POCSO Act allowing his release before Trial Court on furnishing bond and sureties citing judgmentmandate of speedy trial and jail overcrowding.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant on furnishing personal bond and two sureties with conditions restricting tampering ensuring presence at trial court and appearing on framed charges.

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

¶1

Court No. - 85

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11335 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Rajkumar Chauhan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Dubey,Santosh Kumar Mishra 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 informed that notice on opposite party no.2 has been served but no one has turned up to oppose this bail application.

¶7

Applicant was earlier enlarged on bail vide order dated 02.02.2023 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 13 of 2022 for the offences allegedly committed under Sections 376, 342 and 3/4 of POCSO Act. Applicant has been implicated under Section 5-M/6 of POCSO Act by the Investigating Officer, subsequently.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the implication of the applicant is only to prevent his release on bail. He is in jail since 16.11.2019.

¶9

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

¶10

For the reasons given in the earlier order of this court, applicant is directed to be released on bail under the added section aforesaid.

¶11

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.

¶12

Let the applicant, Rajkumar Chauhan, involved in Case Crime No.314 of 2019, Special Session Trail No.56 of 2020, under Sections 5-M/6 of POSCO, Police Station Kothibhar, District- Maharajganj 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 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.

¶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, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 7.4.2023 SS

¶21

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

Rajkumar Chauhan v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajkumar Chauhan 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

Vijay Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Firoz @ Jhonjha Vs State of U.P.

Smt Divya Vs State of U.P.

Amit Rajpoot Vs State of U.P.

Islam Vs State of U.P.

Tauseef Vs State of U.P.