Dismissed

Sadhu Yadav @ Ramashankar Yadav v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC24 Feb 2023BAIL/53231/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the bail application in a POCSO case due to the gravity of the offence and victim vulnerability, directing the trial court to conclude the trial within one year and adopt strict measures for witness attendance.

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed; trial court directed to conclude trial within one year; police and authorities directed to ensure witness attendance; fortnightly trial reports mandated.

Sadhu Yadav @ Ramashankar Yadav Vs State of… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 74

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 53231 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sadhu Yadav @ Ramashankar Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Desh Ratan Chaudhary Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajneesh Shukla

¶4

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶5

Shri Markandey Singh, learned AGA for the State contends that the police authorities in compliance of the directions issued by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 46998 of 2020 (Junaid Vs State of U.P. and another) reported at 2021 (6) ADJ 511 and with a view to implement the provisions of POCSO Act, 2012 read with POCSO Rules, 2020, have served the bail application upon the victim/legal guardian as well as upon the CWC.

¶6

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 67 of 2022 (Sessions Trial No. 294 of 2022) at Police Station Vindhyachal, District Mirzapur, under Sections 363, 376 IPC and Section 5M/6 of POCSO Act. The applicant is in jail since 23.04.2022.

¶7

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned trial court on 04.08.2022.

¶8

The victim is a minor. The victim has specifically named

¶9

the applicant as the principal offender who had committed rape with her. The version of the victim is consistent in her statements under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and Section 164 Cr.P.C. and supports the prosecution case. The prosecution evidence connects the applicant with the offence. The offence is grave. From the material available in the record, there is likelihood that the applicant committed the offence. The victim is vulnerable. At this stage, no case for bail is made out.

¶10

Without going into the merits of the case, the bail application is dismissed.

¶11

Considering the gravity of the offence, interest of justice will be served by directing the learned trial court to expedite the trial and conclude it within a stipulated period of time.

¶12

The trial court is directed to conclude the trial within a period of one year from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The learned trial court shall proceed with the hearing on a day to day basis to ensure that the above stipulated timeline of one year is strictly adhered to. All witnesses and counsels are directed to cooperate with the trial proceedings.

¶13

The trial court has also to be conscious of the rights of the accused persons and is under obligation of law to ensure that all expeditious, necessary and coercive measures as

¶14

per law are adopted to ensure the presence of witnesses. Counsels or parties who delay or impede the proceedings should not only be discouraged from doing so but in appropriate cases exemplary costs should also be imposed on such parties/ counsel.

¶15

The learned trial court shall promptly take out all strict coercive measures against all the witnesses in accordance with law who fail to appear in the trial proceeding. Counsels or parties who delay or impede the proceedings should not only be discouraged from doing so but in appropriate cases exemplary costs should also be imposed on such parties/ counsel.

¶16

Police and administrative authorities of the State are also directed to ensure that the coercive measures adopted by the court are promptly executed to ensure the presence of the witnesses on the appointed date before the trial court.

¶17

The trial judge shall submit a fortnightly report on the progress of trial and the steps taken to comply with this order to the learned District Judge.

¶18

A copy of this order be communicated to the learned trial judge through the learned District Judge, Mirzapur by the Registrar (Compliance) by FAX.

¶19

Order Date :- 24.2.2023 Dhananjai

¶20

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

Sadhu Yadav @ Ramashankar Yadav v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sadhu Yadav @ Ramashankar Yadav 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Naresh Kashyap and Another Vs State of U.P.

Sushil @ Kala Vs State of U.P.

Wahid Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ashfaq Ahmad Vs State of U.P.

Akram Mansuri Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sarvesh Kumar Vs State of U.P.