Allowed

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

Allahabad HC2 Dec 2023BAIL/35011/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Siddharth, J. allowed bail to the applicant in a case alleging abduction, rape, and penetrative sexual assault of a minor. The court granted bail citing jail overcrowding and Article 21, without expressing an opinion on the case's merits.

What did the court decide?

Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties subject to eight conditions including non-tampering and attendance.

Ritik Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:228430

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35011 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Ritik Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Raj Pandey,Shubham Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Raj Kumar Dhama

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Shubham Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Raj Kumar Dhama, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A for the State.

¶7

There are allegations against the applicant of abduction of a minor girl, commission of offences of rape and penetrative sexual assault.

¶8

Counsel for the applicant submits that the victim has claimed her age as 17 years and she has admitted consenting relationship with the applicant and eloping with him to different places on her own sweet will. In the statement of victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she has allegation that applicant threatened her and took her to Delhi and kept her in a room for 12 days and committed the alleged offence.

¶9

Counsel for the applicant also submits that the victim as per statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., eloped with the applicant with consent and was living with him at Delhi. She was caught by the police along with the applicant roaming freely in the night. It is a case of false implication of the applicant. Before the doctor, she stated that she eloped with the applicant on her own sweet will. The applicant is in jail since 22.05.2023 and has no criminal history to his credit.

¶10

On the other hand learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail.

¶11

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

¶12

fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India; considering the dictum of 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.

¶13

Let the applicant, Ritik, involved in Case Crime No. 370 of 2023, under Sections- 363, 376 IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Baraut, District- Baghpat, 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.

¶14

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

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(iv) 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 under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶18

(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.

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

Order Date :- 2.12.2023 Rohit

¶22

Digitally signed by :- ROHIT DAS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ritik 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

Suraj Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Anil Prajapati Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Jishan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Nilesh Patel Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rahul Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ishwar Tyagi Vs State of U.P.