Allowed

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

Allahabad HC12 Oct 2023BAIL/57178/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application regarding charges of abduction, rape, and offenses under POCSO and SC/ST Acts, the High Court granted bail citing procedural delays, jail overcrowding, and lack of conclusive evidence despite the gravity of the offenses.

What did the court decide?

Released on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, subject to specific conditions regarding court attendance and tampering with evidence.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:197645

¶2

Court No. - 64

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 57178 of 2022

¶4

Applicant :- Istkar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Faiz Hasnain,Ajay Kumar Jagdish,Mohd. Hasham,Syed Riyaz Askari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

There is allegation against the applicant of abduction of minor girl, commission of offence of rape and offence under Section 3/4(2) of POCSO Act.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is allegation against the applicant and co-accused, Rashid, of abduction of two girls and commission of alleged offences. PW-III is one of the girl who has stated before the trial court that offence was not committed against her. She has not named anyone. PW-III has been declared hostile. Co-accused, Rashid, has been enlarged on bail by this court vide order dated 06.02.2023 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.52664 of 2022. Applicant is in jail since 08.07.2022 and has no criminal history to his credit.

¶10

Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above submissions.

¶11

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 and recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 and 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.

¶12

Let the applicant, Istkar, involved in Case Crime No.268 of 2022, under Sections 363, 376(3) I.P.C and Section 3/4(2) of POCSO Act and Section 3(2) (5) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Kandhala, District- Shamli 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

¶13

conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶14

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

¶15

(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.

¶16

(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.

¶17

(iv) In case the applicant misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail 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.

¶18

(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.

¶19

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.

¶20

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

¶21

The trial court is directed to conclude the trial against the applicant as expeditiously as possible, preferable within a period of one year.

¶22

Registrar (compliance) is directed to communicate this order to the trial court concerned within ten days.

¶23

Order Date :- 12.10.2023 SS

¶24

Digitally signed by :- SURENDAR SINGH NARANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Istkar 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

Shyam Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.

Baba @ Iqbal Khan Vs State of U.P.

Rahul Singh Vs State of U.P.

Arvind Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sunil Kumar @ Ramu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Virendra Bind Vs State of U.P.