Allowed

Akash Mishra v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC7 Aug 2023BAIL/24267/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed a bail application for Akash Mishra charged with rape and POCSO offences, citing jail overcrowding and Article 21 rights without deciding on the merits of the case.

What did the court decide?

Order to release applicant on bail with personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions preventing tampering with evidence and ensuring attendance.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:157866

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24267 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Akash Mishra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.

¶7

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Akash Mishra, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 249 of 2022, under Sections 376,506 IPC Section 3/4 POCSO Act and section 3(2)5 of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes(P.A.)Act, 1989 Police Station Machhalishar, District- Jaunpur, during pendency of trial.

¶8

There is allegation against the applicant of causing offence of rape,threatening and penetrative sexual assault of minor girl belonging to schedule caste. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that earlier also applicant was implicated in case crime no. 05 of 2022 under sections 363,366 I.P.C. section 3(2)5 of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and section 17/18 of POCSO Act by the same prosecutrix.After he was enlarged on bail, present implication has been made falsely.Both the incidents are same but two First Information Reports were lodged.As per her earlier statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. she has clearly a consenting party and is aged about 18 years. In her earlier statement she was partly a consenting party. Her medical report does not supports the prosecution case. The applicant is in jail since 3.10.2022 and has no criminal history.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶10

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above;

¶11

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; considering the dictum of Apex Court in the 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 ; 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

¶12

Let the applicant 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.

¶13

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶14

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶15

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

¶16

That 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 ofÏcer;

¶17

The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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

¶18

in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicant.

¶19

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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶20

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶21

Order Date :- 7.8.2023

¶22

Atul kr. sri.

¶23

Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Akash Mishra v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akash Mishra 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shanu @ Furkan Vs State of U.P.

Jitendra Vs State of U.P.

Naresh Teotia Vs State of U.P.

Vipin Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Bhajju @ Mahendra Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Parshuram Sahni Vs State of U.P. and Another