Allowed

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

Allahabad HC28 Jan 2023BAIL/52778/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed bail to applicant Pankaj accused of rape and POCOS offences against a minor, citing contradictory victim statements, lack of definite medical opinion, and jail overcrowding impacting Article 21 rights, without expressing opinion on case merits.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Pankaj released on bail upon furnishing personal bond and two sureties subject to specific conditions including non-tampering with evidence and presence for trial milestones.

Pankaj Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

Reserved On:- 24.01.2023 Delivered On:- 28.01.2023

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52778 of 2022 Applicant :- Pankaj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sheetala Prasad Pandey

¶4

Hon'ble Siddharth, J.

¶5

Heard Shri Amit Kumar Singh, learned counsel for applicant; Sheetala Prasad Pandey, learned counsel for informant as well as learned AGA for State.

¶6

There is allegation against the applicant of committing the offence of rape and penetrative sexual assault against a minor girl aged about 14 years.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that initially the applicant was initially implicated under Sections 354(B) and 7/8 POCOS Act. FIR was lodged after one day of the incident. The victim and her mother refused to get internal medical examination of the victim conducted by doctor. In the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she has stated that she knows the applicant for last about 1 year and loves her. On 31.08.2022 she had left the house on her own for going to Delhi when she was seen by her aunt and she informed her father and then she was caught. She tried to commit suicide by way of hanging. However, in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., subsequently she made allegations of rape against the applicant and thereafter she got herself medically examined by the doctor. In the medico-legal examination report, the doctor has not given any definite opinion of commission of rape

¶8

¶9

against the victim. The applicant is in jail since 09.09.2022 and has no criminal history to his credit.

¶10

Learned A.G.A and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶11

In the counter affidavit filed by learned A.G.A., there is no explanation why the stand of the victim was contradictory. Earlier she refused to get herself medically examined but after her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has consented to get her internal medical examination. The age of the victim has been found to be about 15 years. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and contradictory statements of the victim regarding her medical examination, it appears a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶12

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 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.

¶13

Let the applicant, Pankaj, involved in Case Crime No. 277 of 2022, under Sections 376 IPC and ¾ POCSO Act, Police Station- Chhawani,

¶14

¶15

District- Basti, 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

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.

¶17

(ii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when 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.

¶18

(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.

¶19

(iv) In case the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial 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.

¶20

(v) 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 absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶21

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

¶22

¶23

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

¶24

Order Date :- 28.01.2023 Rohit

¶25

Digitally signed by :- ROHIT DAS High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankaj 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

Dhanpal Vs State of U.P.

Haripal Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Gajendra Vs State of U.P.

Istekar Vs State of U.P.

Salma Vs State of U.P.

Ranveer Vs State of U.P.