Allowed

Banti @ Ajeet Kumar Dubey v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow and 3 Others

Allahabad HC10 Apr 2024/1277/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Held that the applicant is entitled to release on bail in a criminal case involving POCSO and IPC offences, considering the change in the nature of the charge sheet and delay in trial, subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Application allowed; applicant released on bail on personal bond and two sureties subject to conditions.

Banti @ Ajeet Kumar Dubey Vs State of U.P… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:29393

¶2

Court No. - 8

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1277 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Banti @ Ajeet Kumar Dubey Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow And 3 Others

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Gupta,Dinesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashish Kumar Singh

¶6

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel appearing for the complainant.

¶8

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in F.I.R. No. 157 of 2019, under Sections 354-B, 308, 307, 452 IPC, Section 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station Khodaur, District Pratapgarh with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that prior to lodging of the present F.I.R., the applicant was not having any criminal antecedent and after lodging of the present case, proceedings under the provisions of Goonda Act were initiated. It is also submitted that the F.I.R. was lodged under Sections 395, 397, 354-A I.P.C. and after investigation, charge sheet has been filed on 13.02.2020 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 325 I.P.C. Thereafter, the applicant was enlarged on bail on 19.02.2020 and he never misused the liberty of bail. It is next submitted that on the request of the family members of the victim, the investigation was later on transferred to Crime Branch, Prayagraj and charge sheet was submitted under Sections 354-B, 307 I.P.C. and Section 7/8 POCSO Act and summons were issued. Thereafter, charge sheet as well as summoning order was challenged before this Court by means of Application u/s 482 No. 7397 of 2023, in which, vide order dated 01.08.2023, liberty was

¶10

granted to the applicant to appear before the court below and apply for bail. The court below was also directed for granting benefits of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Amanpreet Singh Vs. C.B.I. through Director (Crl. Appeal No. 929 of 2021) . However, the application filed in pursuance of the said order was rejected by the court below and the applicant was taken into custody on 19.12.2023. It is lastly submitted that till today, only P.W. 1 has been examined and there is no possibility of conclusion of trial in near future. It is, thus, submitted that the applicant, who is in jail since 19.12.2023, is entitled for bail. It is also submitted that the applicant will never misuse the liberty of bail and shall fully cooperate in the trial.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant, but does not dispute the fact that earlier the charge sheet was prepared under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 325 I.P.C., in which, the applicant was enlarged on bail on 19.02.2020. Thereafter, charge sheet was filed in added Sections and summons were issued to the applicant.

¶12

On the other hand, learned counsel for the complainant vehemently opposes the prayer of the applicant and submits that investigation was conducted by the Investigating OfÏcer at the initial stage under the influence of the accused persons and thereafter, on the request of the victim's side, the investigation was transferred to other Agency. However, he does not dispute the fact the fact that the applicant was enlarged on bail on 19.02.2020 and on the summons being issued, he appeared before the court on 19.12.2023.

¶13

Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and going through the contents of F.I.R., charge sheet as well as other relevant documents, it is evident that initially, charge sheet was prepared under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 325 I.P.C., in which, the applicant was granted bail on

¶14

19.02.2020. Thereafter, investigation was transferred and charge sheet was submitted in some added Sections.

¶15

In such circumstances, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.

¶16

Application stands allowed.

¶17

Let applicant -Banti @ Ajeet Kumar Dubey be released on bail in F.I.R. No. 157 of 2019 (supra), on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-

¶18

(i) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.

¶19

(ii) 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 ofÏce or tamper with the evidence.

¶20

(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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.

¶21

(iv) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufÏcient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229A IPC.

¶22

(v) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. may be issued and if applicant fails 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

¶23

IPC.

¶24

(vi) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge; and (c) 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 sufÏcient 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.

¶25

Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.

¶26

Order Date :- 10.4.2024 VKS

¶27

Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Banti @ Ajeet Kumar Dubey v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Banti @ Ajeet Kumar Dubey v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vivek Dixit vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko and Another

Gautam vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Pratap Singh Chauhan vs Mr. Rajiv Kumar Srivastava, Addl. General Manager Iti Ltd., Rae Bareli

Neelam Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Panchayati Raj, Lucknow and 3 Others

Faiz Ahmad vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko.

Smt. Pratima Saxena vs Anil Kumar 3rd Apar Mukhya Sachiv, Shram Evam Sevayojan, U.P., Lko. and Another