Allowed

Jageshwar Rajbhar @ Jaksari v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC22 May 2023BAIL/4588/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under CrPC, the Allahabad High Court allowed the relief without expressing an opinion on the merits. The court accepted the applicant's submission that the I.O. concluded no offence was committed and the victim refused medical examination, finding a case made out for bail.

What did the court decide?

Applicant to be released on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and two heavy local sureties, subject to conditions regarding court attendance and notice of evidence.

Jageshwar Rajbhar @ Jaksari Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:112052

¶2

Court No. - 78

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4588 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Jageshwar Rajbhar @ Jaksari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Kumar Ashutosh Srivastava,Nagendra Bahadur Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Hemant Kumar,Pradeep Kumar Keshri

¶5

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State, learned counsel for the first informant and perused the record.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the incident is alleged to have taken place on 03.05.2019, whereas an application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. was filed on 18.06.2019 without there being any plausible explanation of such delay, thereafter pursuant to the same, F.I.R. has been registered against the applicant and others. Thereafter, the matter was entrusted for investigation in which, after recording of statements and collecting evidence, the Investigating Officer submitted final report against which, protest petition was filed, in which the applicant was summoned and after surrendering, the applicant has been sent to jail. Learned counsel further submits once the Investigating Officer came to the conclusion that no offence has been committed by the applicant, as such submitted final report and that the informant only to harass the applicant has falsely implicated the applicant, who is an innocent person Learned counsel has next argued that the victim is aged about 16 years at the time of incident and that the victim has refused to undergo for medical examination. It is thus contended that the once the victim has refused to undergo for internal 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 before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the

¶8

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. He next submits that applicant is languishing in jail since 03.12.2022 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 Jageshwar Rajbhar alias Jaksari involved in Case Crime No.436 of 2019, S.T.No. 281 of 2022 under Sections 323, 354-A, 376 (3), 452 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Sarnath, District Varanasi, 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 bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶13

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.

¶14

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.

¶15

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.

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 22.5.2023 S.Ali

¶19

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

Jageshwar Rajbhar @ Jaksari v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jageshwar Rajbhar @ Jaksari 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

Ratnesh Pal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Jitendra Vs State of U.P.

Devendra Kumar Rajput Vs State of U.P.

Mani Yadav Vs State of U.P.

Manoj Mishra Vs State of U.P.

Aakash Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others