In this bail application, the court granted release to the applicant charged under POCSO Act and IPC sections. The court allowed bail without observing on the merits but noted arguments regarding victim's age and consent.
Applicant released on bail by furnishing personal bond and two sureties to the satisfaction of the court below.
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:185485
Court No. - 66
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41472 of 2023
Applicant :- Vakeel Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Arun Kumar,Sanjay Kumar Sharma,Satendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
Shri Chandan Agrawal, learned AGA 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 bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 644 of 2022 at Police Station-Bhajoi, District-Sambhal under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and Section 3, 4, 5j(ii) and 6 of the POCSO Act. The applicant is in jail since 07.04.2023.
The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned trial court on 26.06.2023.
The following arguments made by Shri Satendra
Singh, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, Shri Chandan Agrawal, learned AGA from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:
U.P. and others (Criminal Misc. Bail Application
No. 55026 of 2021) on the following grounds:
(i) There are material contradictions in the age of the victim as recorded in various prosecution documents.
(ii) The victim in her statements under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. has asserted that she is 21 years of age.
(iii) Medico-legal examination (not the age determination test) records that the victim is 17 years of age.
(iv). The medical report drawn up to determine the
age of the victim opines that she is about 17 years of age.
Two submissions are made in regard to the aforesaid medical report. Firstly, the range of error in determining the age is about two years and the same should be read in favour of the applicant at this stage. Secondly, the relevant scientific criteria as per latest medical protocol which would establish the majority of the victim has been excluded from consideration in the medical report. The medical report is flawed. In fact the victim is a major.
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- Vakeel 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.
Order Date :- 25.9.2023 Vandit
Digitally signed by :- VANDIT AGRAWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether bail should be granted to the applicant in case of offences under POCSO Act and IPC regarding alleged age discrepancy and consent.
Whether the age of the victim recorded in prosecution documents is accurate.
Whether the applicant needs to be enlarged on bail after the trial court dismissed the application.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Junaid Vs State of U.P. and anotherReferred¶6
2021 (6) ADJ 511
Monish Vs. State of U.P. and othersReferred¶13
Monish Vs. State of U.P. and others (Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 55026 of 2021)
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Vakeel
State Of U.P.
3 Others
Ajay Bhanot
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
