The Allahabad High Court granted bail to the applicant in a POCSO case. The court noted material contradictions regarding the victim's age and lack of corroborative medical evidence, entrusting defense counsel to assist pro bono due to ongoing strikes.
The applicant was released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two sureties.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:177495
Court No. - 66
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38753 of 2023
Applicant :- Rajkumar Kevat Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Akash Deep Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Aditya Kumar Rai
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
Matter is called out. None appears on behalf of the applicant to press the bail application. Name of counsel for the applicant is shown in the cause list. Learned AGA for the State is present.
Learned counsel at the Bar has been requested to assist the Court in the matter. This Court in the light of the holding in Maneesh Pathak vs. State of U.P. passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 18536 of 2020 is not dismissing the case for non prosecution. Learned members at the Bar have volunteered to assist the Court pro bono in the highest tradition of the profession. The Court has appointed learned counsel as amicus curiae.
Learned AGA for the State contends that the police authorities in compliance of the directions issued by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 46998 of 2020 (Junaid Vs State of U.P. and another) reported at 2021 (6) ADJ 511 and with a view to implement the
provisions of POCSO Act, 2012 read with POCSO Rules, 2020, have served the bail application upon the victim/legal guardian as well as upon the CWC.
By means of the the bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.312 of 2023 at Police Station-Campierganj, District-Gorakhpur under Section 376 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act and Section 3(2)5 of SC/ST Act. The applicant is in jail since 01.06.2023.
The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned trial court on 18.07.2023.
The following arguments made by learned amicus curiae on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by learned AGA from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:
(Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 55026 of 2021) and on the following grounds:
(i) There are material contradictions in the age of the victim as recorded in various prosecution documents.
(ii) The age of the victim was incorrectly got registered in the school records by the victim's parents to give her an advantage in life. The school records disclosing her age as 14 years are unreliable.
(iii) The victim in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and Section 164 Cr.P.C. has stated that she is 15 years of age.
(iv) Medico-legal examination (not the age determination test) records that the victim is 15 years of age.
(v) No medical examination to determine the correct age of the victim as per the latest scientific criteria and medical protocol by eminent doctors from a reputed institution was got done by the prosecution as it would establish the majority of the victim and falsify the prosecution case. The victim is in fact a major.
commission of rape by the applicant with the victim has not been produced by the prosecution.
In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant- Rajkumar Kevat be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
The Court has been informed that the lawyers in districtGorakhpur are striking work. Liberty of citizens is too sacrosanct and cannot be held to ransom by striking lawyers.
The District Legal Services Authority (DLSA), Gorakhpur shall ensure that appropriate legal aid is made available to the applicant for purposes of submitting sureties and completion of other formalities for being set forth at liberty.
Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the District Legal Services Authority (DLSA), Gorakhpur for onward communication to the applicant who is in jail, and for assisting the applicant in the manner stated above.
Order Date :- 13.9.2023 Dhananjai
Digitally signed by :- DHANANJAI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in the present case when the prosecution case regarding the victim's age and consent is inconclusive and potentially flawed.
Whether the inconsistencies in the victim's statements and medical reports regarding age and lack of injury justify the grant of bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Maneesh Pathak vs. State of U.P.Referred¶7
Maneesh Pathak vs. State of U.P. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 18536 of 2020
Junaid Vs State of U.P. and anotherReferred¶9
Junaid Vs State of U.P. and another 2021 (6) ADJ 511
Monish Vs. State of U.P. and othersReferred¶15
Monish Vs. State of U.P. and others Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 55026 of 2021
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Rajkumar Kevat
State Of U.P.
Ajay Bhanot
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
