Allowed

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

Allahabad HC30 Oct 2023BAIL/43708/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge High Court allowed bail to an undertrial accused facing charges under IPC and POCSO Act. The court relied on jail overcrowding and Fundamental Rights without expressing a final opinion on the merits. Bail granted with conditions to ensure trial attendance.

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions including cooperation in trial and non-tampering with evidence.

Rohan Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:206940

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43708 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Rohan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Pathak,Akhilesh Chaubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

List revised.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. has informed that notice has been served upon the informant but no one appears on his behalf.

¶8

Supplementary afÏdavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.

¶10

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Rohan, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 188 of 2023, under Sections 354,376,452,506 IPC and section 3/4 POCSO Act Police Station Rudrapur, District- Deoria, during pendency of trial.

¶11

There are allegations against the applicant regarding outraging the modesty of minor girl criminal intimidation and commission of rape after entering into her house.Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that subsequently on the basis of statement of the victim implication under section 376 and 3/4 POCSO Act was further made. It is a case of false implication. In the First Information Report place of incident is stated to be house of the victim.However in the statement of the victim under section 164 Cr.P.C. she has alleged that incident took place in the corn field and other persons have been implicated by the victim.As per radiological report of the victim she is aged about 18 years.Therefore she is not a minor. The applicant is in jail since

¶12

11.5.2023. He has criminal history of one case, which has been explained in paragraph-3 of the supplementary afÏdavit.

¶13

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶14

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 fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India; considering the dictum of Apex Court in the recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the 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

¶15

Let the applicant 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.

¶16

The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

¶17

The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

¶18

The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶19

That the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly,

¶20

make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police ofÏcer;

¶21

The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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 to ensure presence of the applicant.

¶22

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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufÏcient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶23

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

¶24

Order Date :- 30.10.2023

¶25

Atul kr. sri.

¶26

Digitally signed by :- ATUL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rohan 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

Neeraj Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Smt. Kheerpati Vs State of U.P.

Girja Vs State of U.P.and 3 Others

Smt Chameli Devi Vs State of U.P.

Kaushal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others