Allowed

Jitendra @ Jaykaran v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC1 Feb 2023BAIL/21498/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant in a non-bailable offence involving POCSO and other IPC sections. The court held that the applicant made out a prima facie case for bail, considering the falsity of allegations and complicity of co-accused, without expressing an opinion on the merits of the charge.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two heavy sureties subject to specified conditions.

Jitendra @ Jaykaran Vs State of U.P. and… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21498 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Jitendra @ Jaykaran Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Kumar Pandey,P.K. Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

List has been revised. There is service of notice on the informant as per the report of C.J.M. Kanpur Dehat on 29.6.2019, which is on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned Advocate holding brief for Sri P.K. Singh, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri R.M. Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 186 of 2018, under Sections 323, 342, 376, 506, 34 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Moosanagar, District Kanpur Dehat, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. At the outset, learned counsel has claimed parity with the co-accused person Ram Vilas, who has been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 18.10.2022 passed in CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46097 of 2019. Learned counsel has stated that both the witnesses i.e. P.W. 1 informant and P.W. 2 victim have not supported the prosecution story. Learned counsel has also stated that P.W. 2 victim has been declared hostile at the outset by the public prosecutor and has been cross examined. Learned counsel has next stated that there is no likelihood of conviction of applicant in the case. It is further stated that in all, four witnesses have been examined to date.

¶9

Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 17.12.2018. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶11

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, pending trial and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment, at this stage, 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- Jitendra @ Jaykaran involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

¶13

i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶14

ii. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶15

iii. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶16

iv. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶17

v. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶19

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

¶20

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶21

Order Date :- 1.2.2023\Shalini

¶22

Digitally signed by :- SHALINI JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Jitendra @ Jaykaran v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jitendra @ Jaykaran 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramendra Singh @ Badshah Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Ratna Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kailash Vs State of U.P.

Satendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Basant Kumar Verma Vs State of U.P.

Mainpal Singh Vs State of U.P.