Allowed

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

Allahabad HC18 Jul 2023BAIL/14511/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application by Pappu, accused of abduction, rape, and POCSO offences where age discrepancies were alleged, was allowed. The High Court granted bail subject to strict conditions ensuring surrender, presence in court, and non-interference with evidence, citing jail overcrowding and fundamental rights.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail subject to personal bond and two sureties with conditions ensuring presence in court, no tampering with evidence, and strict adherence to trial dates.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:142272

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14511 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Pappu

¶5

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Raghvendra Prakash Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Afshan Shafaut

¶6

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶7

AGA has informed that notice on opposite party no.2 has been served, but no one has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party no.2 to oppose this bail application.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant; learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶9

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Pappu, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 397 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Raunapar, District- Azamgarh, during pendency of trial.

¶10

There are allegations against the applicant of abduction of a minor girl with intent to marry, commission of offence of rape and penetrative sexual assault.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the victim and applicant both are aged about 20 years. As per high school certificate, the date of birth of the victim is January, 2003. The applicant is also of same age. The victim went with the appellant to Azamgarh and thereafter from Azamgarh to Varanasi and then from Varanasi to Allahabad and stayed in rented room for a month at Allahabad. Thereafter she has falsely implicated the applicant on the allegation of abduction and rape. He has submitted that the victim neither raised alarm for help during travel nor in rented room, Allahabad, where she stayed. The appellant has no criminal history to his credit and he is languishing in jail since 29.12.2022. In case, the appellant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

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 deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶13

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping in view 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; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of

¶14

India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. C.B.I. & Another, passed in S.L.P.(Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021, judgement dated 11.7.2022 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid 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 with the following conditions that :-

¶15

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

¶16

(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.

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

(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.

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

Order Date :- 18.7.2023 Ruchi Agrahari

¶23

Digitally signed by :- RUCHI AGRAHARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pappu 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

Sachin Gupta @ Sanjeev Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Madanlal @ Puttu Vs State of U.P.

Rinku @ Dileep Vs State of U.P.

Subba @ Rajendra Vs State of U.P.

Balwan Vs State of U.P.

Waris Vs State of U.P.