Allowed

Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC5 Apr 2023BAIL/5457/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a bail application where the applicant sought release pending trial for offenses including POCSO and IPC sections. The single judge allowed the bail application on the ground of parity with a co-accused who was already released, after perusing the record and hearing counsel.

What did the court decide?

The applicant Pratap Singh is released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties, subject to conditions.

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

¶1

Court No. - 79

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5457 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Pratap Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Madhukar Maurya,Rajeev Goswami,Tikendra Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sushil Kumar Pandey

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

List has been revised.

¶6

Heard Shri Rajeev Goswami, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Sushil Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the informant as well as Shri V.K. Gupta, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.505 of 2022, under Sections 354(C), 376(D), 328, 506 I.P.C. and 5g/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Jait, District Mathura, during the pendency of trial.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that similarly placed co-accused person Kanha @ Virendra has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 29.03.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.3575 of 2023. The applicant is languishing in jail since 14.12.2022, having no criminal history to his credit. He further submitted that since the role of the applicant is identical to that of coaccused, who has already been enlarged on bail, he is also entitled to be enlarged on bail on the ground of parity.

¶9

The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. However, the aforesaid factual aspects of parity to the co-accused and of no criminal history of the applicant, has not been disputed by him.

¶10

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and also taking into consideration the judgment of the Apex Court passed in the case of Paras Ram Vishnoi vs. The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation , MANU/SCOR/22410/2021 and the judgment of this Court passed in the case of Nanha S/o Nabhan Kha vs. State of U.P., 1993 Cri.L.J. 938 , and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant

¶11

has made out a case for bail on the ground of parity. The bail application is allowed on the ground of parity.

¶12

Let the applicant- Pratap Singh involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.

¶13

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶14

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶15

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶16

(iv) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

¶17

(v) 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 officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶19

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

¶20

It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion on the testimony of the witnesses.

¶21

Order Date :- 5.4.2023 Ravi Kant

¶22

Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pratap Singh v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pratap Singh 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

Ratan Vs State of U.P.

Ranjeet Vs State of U.P. and Others

Narendra Pal Vs State of U.P.

Rahul Vs State of U.P.

Sunil Alias Sheriya Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sujit Singh Vs State of U.P.