Allowed

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

Allahabad HC2 Jun 2023BAIL/4383/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This bail application was allowed for the applicant, Jaanu, who was waiting for trial in a case involving POCSO, kidnapping, and rape charges. The court accepted his application despite the serious nature of allegations, subject to strict conditions.

What did the court decide?

The applicant was released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy local sureties, subject to conditions regarding court attendance and prohibition of adjournments.

Jaanu Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:123561

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4383 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Jaanu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Mrityunjay Singh,Kamlesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶6

Ms. Chaman Aara, learned counsel has filed her power on behalf of the applicant today in the Court, which is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶7

It has been argued by Ms. Aara, learned counsel for the applicant that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has not levelled any allegation of rape against the applicant whereas, in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she has levelled allegation of rape against the applicant. She thus submits that there is gross contradiction in the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. She further submits that though the victim alleges to be minor in fact, she is major. and that the victim has refused to undergo for medical examination, which is evident from the perusal of the medico legal examination report itself, copy of which is annexed as Annexure-4 to the affidavit accompanying the bail application. It is thus contended that the once the victim has refused to undergo for medical examination, which itself cast a shadow of doubt on the prosecution thus, no offence against the applicant is made out. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed

¶8

before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused have also been mentioned. It has also been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required and is also ready to accept all the conditions which the Court may deem fit to impose upon him. She next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 21.06.2022 having no criminal history.

¶9

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserve any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

¶10

Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of evidence, and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. Hence the bail application is allowed.

¶11

Let applicant Jaanu involved in Case Crime No. 509 of 2022 under Sections 363, 366, 328, 376 I.P.C., Section 3/4 of POCSO Act and Section 3 (2) 5 SC/ST Act, Police Station Kosikalan, District Mathura, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-

¶12

I. 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

¶13

bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶14

II. The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶15

III. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶16

IV. 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 sufficient 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.

¶17

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

¶18

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

¶19

Order Date :- 2.6.2023 S.Ali

¶20

Digitally signed by :- SHAUKAT ALI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaanu 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Muktinath @ Godhan Vs State of U.P.

Vikash Keshari Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Guddu @ Kushal Pal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Narendra Vs State of U.P.

Krishna Vs State of U.P.

Pravesh Kumar Sahu Vs State of U.P.