Allowed

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

Allahabad HC7 Aug 2023BAIL/19740/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. was filed by Salman, accused of offences under IPC and POCSO Act. The court noted medical reports indicated simple injuries and the applicant was absent from the crime scene. Bail was granted on a personal bond with two sureties and specific undertakings.

What did the court decide?

Release of applicant Salman on bail requiring personal bond, two sureties, and undertakings regarding attendance, property disposal, and address change.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:157937

¶2

Court No. - 77

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19740 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Salman Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sundeep Shukla, Manoj Kumar Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Beena Mishra,Syed Shahnawaz Shah

¶5

Hon'ble Mrs. Renu Agarwal,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Sundeep Shukla assisted by Shri Manoj Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Mohd. Nurdin holding brief of Mr. Syed Shahnawaz Shah, learned counsel for the informant, Ms. Beena Mishra, learned counsel appearing for Legal Services Committee, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking bail in Case Crime No. 29 of 2023, under Sections 354, 323, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C. and under Section 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station Saroorpur, District Meerut.

¶8

Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the injuries sustained by the victim girl is simple in nature and according to medical report there are no sign of sexual assault. It is submitted that the offence is of 04.02.2023 and the F.I.R. was registered on the next day without explaining the delay, however, time of incident is not mentioned in the F.I.R. It is submitted that there was dispute between childrens of first informant and the applicant. It is further submitted that on 05.03.2023, I.O. has concluded that name of the applicant is to be segregated from the investigation and further Sections 354, 376, 511 I.P.C. and 7/8 POCSO Act were deleted, however, learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut vide order dated 20.03.2023 held that offence under Section 307 I.P.C. is made out and he further directed him to appear before the POCSO court. It is next submitted that the applicant was not present at the place of alleged occurrence on alleged date of incident as per the C.D.R. and the statement eye-

¶9

witness. It is lastly submitted that the applicant has no criminal antecedent and he is languishing in jail since 03.04.2023 and if he is enlarged on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and shall co-operate with the trial.

¶10

On the other hand, learned counsel for the informant submitted that Afsana (wife of first informant) sustained serious injuries in order to save her daughter from sexual assault and opposed the prayer for bail.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the fact that the applicant was not present at the place of occurrence as per the C.D.R. report, injuries sustained by the victim girl is of simple nature, applicant does not have any criminal history and he is languishing in jail since 03.04.2023 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it would be appropriate to enlarge the accused-applicant on bail.

¶12

Let applicant Salman be released on bail in the above case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Court concerned with the following conditions :-

¶13

(i) 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

(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.

¶15

(iii) 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,

¶16

under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶17

(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 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

(v) The applicant shall also furnish an undertaking from the sureties that the properties (movable/immovable) which are the basis of accepting the surety, shall not be disposed of by them till the conclusion of trial.

¶19

(vi) The applicant shall also give an undertaking to the effect that he will not change his address without prior intimation to the trial court concerned.

¶20

(Renu Agarwal, J.)

¶21

Order Date :- 7.8.2023 Karan

¶22

Digitally signed by :- KUMAR KARAN RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Salman 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

Ram Lal Vs State of U.P.

Rakesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Ram Singh and Anr. Vs State of U.P.

Ashok and Another Vs State of U.P.

Nasir Khan Vs State of U.P.

Islamuddin Vs State of U.P.