Dismissed

Piyush @ Tusa v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC3 Mar 2023BAIL/940/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal Misc. Bail Application regarding charges of outraging modesty of a minor under IPC 376 AB and POCSO. The Single Judge rejected the bail application, noting the victim is four years old and injury was sustained, holding it not a fit case for bail. Trial must be expedited within one year under Apex Court precedents.

What did the court decide?

Bail application rejected. Case directed to be decided expeditiously within one year.

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

¶1

Court No. - 83

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 940 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Piyush @ Tusa Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Dur Vijay Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶5

List has been revised.

¶6

Learned A.G.A. has informed that the notice to the informant has been served on 08.01.2023.

¶7

Heard Shri V.M. Zaidi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Dur Vijay Singh, counsel for applicant and Shri Rajesh Kumar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.205 of 2022, under Sections 376AB, 323 IPC and 5(i)/5(n)/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Barla, District Aligarh with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶9

As per prosecution story, the applicant, who happens to be the cousin of the informant, is stated to have tried to outrage the modesty of his minor four year old daughter and even is stated to have beaten up her on 21.10.2022 at about 9:00 am.

¶10

Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has stated that the allegations levelled in the FIR have been inflated later on as it has been stated in her statement recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C. that the applicant had committed an offence under Section 376 I.P.C. Learned Senior Counsel has further stated that the applicant had given a loan of Rs.40,000/- to the informant and had pressurized him to return it and just to save his skin and not pay back the loan given, the present case has been foisted on him. Learned Senior Counsel has further stated that there is no injury sustained by the victim except slight redness around Vulva. Learned Senior Counsel has further stated that the said injury has been manipulated. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 26.10.2022.

¶11

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail

¶12

application on the ground that the victim is four years old and the applicant has tarnished the pious relation between the girl and him by committing the said offence. The said allegations levelled in the statement recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C have also been observed by the treating doctor..

¶13

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the evidence on record, and also taking into consideration the tender age of the victim i.e. four years and also the injury sustained by her on her private part, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant.

¶14

The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected .

¶15

However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously, preferably within a period of one year from the date of production of a certified copy of this order or as early as possible in view of the principle as has been laid down in the recent judgements of the Apex Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar Vs. State of Punjab; 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India; (2017) 5 SCC 702 , if there is no legal impediment.

¶16

It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.

¶17

Order Date :- 3.3.2023

¶18

Ravi Kant

¶19

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

Piyush @ Tusa v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Piyush @ Tusa 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

Sanjay Singh @ Bachcha Vs State of U.P.

Dinesh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sandeep @ Chandan Nishad Vs State of U.P.

Parvesh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sunil Vs State of U.P.

Gulab Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others