Allowed

Monu Rajbhar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC6 Nov 2023BAIL/47266/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this bail application, the court considered arguments regarding the delay in filing the FIR and the nature of medical evidence. Despite acknowledging the allegations, the court found prima facie grounds to grant bail to the applicant, who was in custody, subject to standard sureties and conditions to ensure fair trial.

What did the court decide?

Bail granted subject to personal bond, two sureties, and conditions against tampering, intimidating witnesses, and committing similar offences.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:212869

¶2

Court No. - 68

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47266 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Monu Rajbhar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Bharti Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶6

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

¶7

It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel further submits that the FIR has been lodged on 5.2.2023 at about 12.59 hours after a lapse of one day delay without giving any plausible explanation which creates doubt. He further submits that as per medical report, no live or dead spermatozoa were seen and doctor has given opinion according to supplementary report that I could not comment on any forceful sexual assault. He next submits that the I.O. concerned without proper and fair investigation of the case has submitted charge sheet against the applicant on 21.4.2023. He further submits that the prosecutrix is a major lady and 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 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

¶8

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 23.2.2023, 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.

¶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 Monu Rajbhar involved in Case Crime No.59 of 2023 under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Cholapur, District , be released on bail on Varanasi, 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:A. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶12

B. The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶13

C. The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. D. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is an accused, or suspected, of the commission of he is suspected.

¶14

E. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. 6. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant in accordance with law.

¶15

Order Date :- 6.11.2023 m.a.

¶16

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AYYUB High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Monu Rajbhar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Monu Rajbhar 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

Mahendra Singh Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Kesher Devi Vs State of U.P.

Hajari Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Indrapal @ Mantri Vs State of U.P.

Suraj Vs State of U.P.and 3 Others

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