Allowed

Joni @ Pawan v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC6 Oct 2023BAIL/40939/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Hon'ble Samit Gopal, J. granted bail to the accused Joni @ Pawan in a trial stage case involving Section 376 IPC. The court noted the relationship was consensual but did not materialize and held the evidence was unlikely to be tampered with.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties in like amounts, subject to specified undertakings and court appearances.

Joni @ Pawan Vs State of U.P. — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:192789

¶2

Court No. - 69

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40939 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Joni @ Pawan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vijeta Kushwaha,Mahendra Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

List revised.

¶7

Heard Sri Mahendra Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Bade Lal Bind, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.

¶8

This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Joni @ Pawan, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 264 of 2023, under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Medical, District Meerut.

¶9

The FIR of the matter was lodged on 26.07.2023 by the victim herself against the applicant alleging therein that she is aged about 20 years. She knows the applicant since last four years. On the false promise that he wants to marry her and loves her, sexually exploited her. When she used to talk for marriage he used to avoid to talk about it. On 17.05.2023 the applicant met her and stated that he is getting married to someone and stated to her that she may live or die. On 20.05.2023 he gave some medicine for consuming and after consuming it, she became unwell then she was treated in hospital.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the relationship was a consensual relationship on some discussion between them for marriage but the same could not materialize and hence the present First Information Report has been lodged. It is argued that the applicant did not give any medicine to the victim for consumption. It is argued that prior to the FIR there was no representation or complaint whatsoever either by the victim or her

¶11

family members against the applicant to any concerned authorities. He further argued that the applicant has no criminal history as stated in para 24 of the affidavit and is in jail since 11.08.2023.

¶12

Per contra, learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer for bail.

¶13

After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records, it is evident that the relationship between the applicant and the victim was a consensual after some discussion of marriage but the same could not materialize hence the present FIR has been lodged. The victim is a major girl aged about 20 years as per FIR.

¶14

Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

¶15

Let the applicant Joni @ Pawan , 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 concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶16

i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.

¶17

ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.

¶18

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

¶19

(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., may be issued and if 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 I.P.C.

¶20

(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.

¶21

(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.

¶22

The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.

¶23

The bail application is allowed .

¶24

Order Date :- 6.10.2023 M. ARIF

¶25

(Samit Gopal, J.)

¶26

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Joni @ Pawan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Joni @ Pawan v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mukarram Gada Vs State of U.P.

Dalel Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shakeeluddin @ Shakil Don Vs State of U.P.

Naresh Vs State of U.P.

Deepak Prajapati Vs State of U.P.

Guddu Alias Saeed Vs State of U.P.