Allowed

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

Allahabad HC15 Feb 2023BAIL/1706/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed a second bail application for a student accused of rape and child sexual abuse. Release was deferred until fact witnesses are examined to prevent witness tampering and ensure trial progress amid jail overcrowding.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail subject to personal bond, two sureties, and conditions regarding testimony attendance to prevent abuse of bail.

Pulkit 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. - 1706 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Pulkit Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Pawan Giri 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

This is second bail application. First bail application was rejected by coordinate bench of this court on 24.03.2022.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that three out of 16 prosecution witnesses has been examined till date. Applicant is in jail since 18.10.2020. He was student aged about 20 years at the time of incident. Trial court is not likely to be concluded in near future.

¶8

Learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.

¶9

After hearing rival contentions, this court is of the view that this is first implication of the applicant. The applicant is directed to be released on bail after statement of the witnesses of fact are recorded by the trial court. In case any witness of fact remain to be examined, his examination shall be concluded within a period of six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶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, Pulkit, involved in Case Crime No.672 of 2020, under Sections 376, 504, 506, 201, 420 I.P.C and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Transport Nagar, District- Meerut 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 :- 15.2.2023 SS

¶20

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pulkit 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bharat Vs State of U.P.

Poonam and Another Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Mamta Vs State of U.P.

Musheer Khan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Vikas Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ramesh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others