In a bail application before the Criminal Misc. Court No. 79, the High Court refused bail to an accused charged under IPC 363, 366, 376-D, 504, and POCSO due to the gravity of the allegations, directing the lower court to conclude the trial expeditiously.
Prayer for bail refused; application rejected. Trial to be concluded within six months.
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.
Court No. - 79 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4370 of 2021 Applicant :- Surendra Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Jata Shankar Pandey,Mukesh Kumar Upadhyay,Ritesh Singh,Suresh Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Suresh Dhar Dwivedi
Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.
Heard Sri Jata Shankar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Suresh Dhar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the complainant and perused the record.
This applicant has been filed with a prayer to release the applicant on bail in case crime No. 526 of 2020, under sections 363, 366, 376-D, 504 IPC and section 5/6 POCSO Act, P.S. Banda, District Shahjahanpur.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Further contended that in the present case victim in her statement recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. has clearly stated that her father badly beaten to her and tried to kill, therefore, she stayed full night at the field of sugarcane and lastly argued that applicant is in jail since 3.10.2020.
Per contra learned counsel for the complainant and learned A.G.A. for the State rebutted the above arguments stated that in her statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. she has stated that accused applicant and co-accused have committed rape with her and co-accused has prepared her video and she has also stated that her date of birth is 25.7.2007 and the gravity of the offence is too much, therefore, the applicant may not be released on bail
Having considered the submissions raised by the counsel for the applicant-accused and the objections raised by learned counsel for the first informant and learned A.G.A. for the State, gravity and severity of the offence and conduct of the applicantaccused, I am of the view that prima facie at this stage grounds are not sufficient to enlarge the applicant-accused on bail. Accordingly, prayer for bail is refused.
Accordingly, this application is rejected .
However, learned court below is directed to conclude the trial of the case expeditiously if possible within six months.
Order Date :- 3.1.2023/RPD/Shashi
Digitally signed by :- RATAN PRAKASH DWIVEDI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant fundamentally imputed in the case can be granted bail given the gravity of the offence.
4 provisions across 3 enactments
Surendra Kumar
Gautam Chowdhary
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
