Vikas Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Court No. - 73

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2307 of 2023

Applicant :- Vikas Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Awadhesh Kumar Sharma,Shesh Nath Bhatt Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ravindra Prakash Srivastava

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Shesh Nath Bhatt, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pradeep Kumar Tewari, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Ravindra Prakash Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

There is allegation against the applicant of enticement of minor girl with intent to marry, commission of offence of rape, threatening, illegal confinement and molestation besides offence 5/6 of POCSO Act.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that from the ossification test report victim she is aged about 17 years. Given margin one year on higher side, she can be considered to be major. The victim has admitted that she went with the applicant to different places and stayed with him for 15 days. Applicant and victim have travelled by means of public transport. At no point of time, she raised any alarm or cried for help from anyone or from the police in the way. Applicant is in jail 12.09.2022 and has no criminal history to his credit.

¶8

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above submissions.

¶9

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.

¶10

Let the applicant, Vikas, involved in Case Crime No.298 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376, 504, 342, 354 I.P.C and 5/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Kalwari, District- Basti 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.

¶11

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

¶12

(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.

¶13

(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.

¶14

(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.

¶15

(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.

¶16

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.

¶17

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

¶18

The trial court is directed to conclude the trial against the applicant as expeditiously as possible, preferable within a period of one year from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶19

Order Date :- 15.2.2023 SS

¶20

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

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.

Pulkit Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Ramesh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others