Allowed

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

Allahabad HC26 May 2023BAIL/52779/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge allowed bail to the applicant in a rape case under IPC and POCSO Act. The court granted bail primarily because the victim gave inconsistent statements at preliminary and subsequent stages, rendering her testimony unreliable. No history of criminality. Standard bail conditions imposed.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail furnishing personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:118185

¶2

Court No. - 75

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52779 of 2022

¶4

Applicant :- Sagum Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Suneel Kumar Mishra,Amber Khanna,Raj Kumar Khanna

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mohd. Kamar Shah Alam

¶6

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

¶7

1- Despite service of notice upon the informant/opposite party no. 2, no one has put in appearance on his behalf.

¶8

2- Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate representing the State.

¶9

3- The instant bail application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the applicant with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 414 of 2022, under Sections 452, 376 of I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station-Tanda, District-Rampur, during the pendency of trial.

¶10

4- As per the prosecution case in brief, the informant who is father of the victim lodged F.I.R. on 19.08.2022 against the applicant Sagum, his brother Aman and one Akesh making allegations inter-alia that on 17.08.2022 at about 5:00 pm when his daughter was alone in her house, the accused persons barged into his house and took her to field of sugarcane which is adjacent to his house where they have committed rape on her one by one.

¶11

5- It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. In fact no such incident took place in the manner as alleged in the F.I.R. In this regard, learned counsel for the applicant placed reliance upon the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of the victim wherein she has stated inter-alia that since the accused persons belongs to her village, therefore,

¶12

she was talking with them, but on seeing the victim along with those boys, her father has lodged F.I.R. She has also stated in clear terms that they did not commit any misdeed with her. It is next argued that when the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of the victim was recorded after three days of her first statement she has made allegation of rape against all the three accused persons including the applicant but after culmination of investigation the complicity of co-accused Aman and Akesh was found false as their location was found somewhere else, therefore, they have been exonerated, which prima-facie indicates that the victim has given a tutored statement. Lastly, it is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that there is no chance of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence. The applicant is languishing in jail since 25.08.2022 having no criminal history to his credit and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the early disposal of the case.

¶13

6- Per contra , learned A.G.A. for the State opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the victim in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has made allegation of rape against the applicant but could not dispute the above factual aspect of the matter as argued on behalf of the applicant.

¶14

7- Having heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the matter in its entirety, I find that the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of the victim was recorded on 20.08.2022, in which she has not made any allegation against the applicant, but after three days on 23.08.2022, she in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has improved her case making allegation of rape against the applicant and other co-accused persons who have been exonerated. It is well settled that where a victim makes two inconsistent statements at different stages, the testimony of such victim become unreliable and unworthy of credence.

¶15

8- Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed .

¶16

9- Let the applicant- Sagum , be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶17

(i) That the applicant shall cooperate in the expeditious disposal of the trial and shall regularly attend the court unless inevitable.

¶18

(ii) That 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 him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police ofÏcer or tamper with the evidence.

¶19

(iii) That after his release, the applicant shall not involve in any criminal activity.

¶20

(iv) The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned before the release of the applicant on bail.

¶21

10- In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.

¶22

11- It is made clear that the observations contained in the instant order are confined to the issue of bail only and shall not affect the merit of the trial.

¶23

Order Date :- 26.5.2023 Kashifa

¶24

Digitally signed by :- KASHIFA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sagum 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

Sohit Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shaukeen Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Salman @ Baqar @ Chhote Vs State of U.P.

Mukendra Nishad Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mahendra Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Panch Bahadur and 8 Others Vs State of U.P.