Allowed

Abhishek v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC9 Feb 2023BAIL/20383/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under sections 323, 342, 364, 376-D, 380, 504, 506 IPC and sections 3/4 POCSO Act, the Court allowed bail noting the victim's refusal of medical examination and contradictory statements. The applicant is released on personal bond and two sureties subject to specified conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant is released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount subject to specified conditions of appearance and conduct.

Abhishek Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 81

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20383 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Abhishek Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ravi Sahu,Prem Prakash Yadav, Sanjay Kumar Sahu

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J.

¶6

This bail application has been filed on behalf of the accused/ applicant in Case Crime No.748 of 2020, under Sections 323, 342, 364, 376-D, 380, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act, Police Station Sihani Gate, District Ghaziabad with prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶7

Heard Shri Prem Prakash Yadav, learned counsel for the accused/ applicant and Shri Alok Kumar Tripathi, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State respondent.

¶8

Service of notice is sufÏcient but none appeared on behalf of the respondent complainant.

¶9

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the accused/ applicant that the accused/ applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the case. In fact, the victim was a consenting party and the victim left her house at her own and asked the applicant to go with her. It is further submitted that the victim refused to undergo medico legal examination as is evident from the report of the doctor, which is annexed as Annexure No.4 to the afÏdavit filed alongwith bail application. It is further submitted that the victim and informant have made contradictory statements under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. The applicant is in jail since 20.4.2020 having no criminal history as has been stated in paragraph 17 of the afÏdavit filed alongwith the bail application. Hence, the applicant be released on bail.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. opposed the bail application and submitted that on the date of incident, the victim was minor girl aged about 17 years as per her date of birth recorded in the High School Certificate, so

¶11

her consent has no meaning in the eyes of law. Hence, the bail application should be rejected.

¶12

Considered the rival submissions made by the parties' counsel and perused the material available on record.

¶13

From perusal of the statements of the informant and the victim recorded recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. as well as the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., it appears that they have made contradictory statements. The victim refused to undergo medico legal examination as is evident from the report of the doctor (Annexure No.4). The applicant is in jail since 20.4.2020.

¶14

Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case as mentioned above, without commenting on merits, I am of the view that the accused/ applicant deserves to be enlarged on bail.

¶15

Accordingly, the bail application filed on behalf of applicant is allowed.

¶16

Let the applicant - Abhishek involved in Case No.748 of 2020 (supra) 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 :-

¶17

(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.

¶18

(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 sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

(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

¶20

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.

¶21

(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 sufÏcient 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.

¶22

(v)The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the ofÏcial website of High Court Allahabad.

¶23

(vi) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

¶24

(vii) The concerned Court/Authority/OfÏcial shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the ofÏcial website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶25

It may be observed that in the event of any breach of the aforesaid conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to proceed for the cancellation of applicant's bail.

¶26

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

¶27

(Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J)

¶28

Order Date :- 9.2.2023/Shukla

¶29

Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH KUMAR SHUKLA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Abhishek v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek v. State of U.P. and Another

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 Autar Vs State of U.P.

Vimal Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Brahm Singh Vs State of U.P.

Rajpal Vs State of U.P.

Gaurav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dinesh Vs State of U.P.