Partly allowed

Rajendra Harijan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy.Deptt. of Home and 3 Others

Allahabad HC22 Jul 2024/39/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order makes interim anticipatory bail granted earlier absolute for the applicant Rajendra Harijan, relying on the Sushila Aggarwal prosecution policy. The applicant is directed to surrender before the trial court upon summons and release on bail subject to standard conditions.

What did the court decide?

Interim anticipatory bail made absolute; applicant directed to surrender to trial court if summoned and released on bail with sureties and standard conditions.

Rajendra Harijan Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:49331

¶2

Court No. - 14

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 39 of 2023 Applicant :- Rajendra Harijan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy.Deptt. Of Home And 3 Others

¶4

Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Kumar,Akhilesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶6

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C. apprehending his arrest in case crime No.327 of 2022 under sections 354-A, 354-B I.P.C. and 7/8 POCSO Act, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, District Pratapgarh.

¶7

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

¶8

This Court while granting interim protection vide order dated 10.01.2023 has passed the following order:-

¶9

"The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime No.327 of 2022 under sections 354-A, 354-B I.P.C. and 7/8 POCSO Act, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, district Pratapgarh.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated. He has been made an accused due to enmity. There is no independent witness of the incident. The alleged eye witnesses are close relatives of the prosecutrix. During investigation, section 354-B I.P.C. has been dropped and charge sheet has been filed only under sections 354-A I.P.C. and sections 7/8 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant undertakes that the applicant shall cooperate in the trial.

¶13

Issue notice to respondent No.2.

¶14

Learned Addl. Government Advocate has opposed the prayer.

¶15

List on 8.2.2023.

¶16

Considering the above aspects of the matter, perusal of the record, the fact that the applicant has cooperated in the investigation, as also the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal and others versus State (NCT of Delhi) and another (2020)5 SCC 1 and without entering into the merit of the case, it would be appropriate to grant interim protection to the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶17

Till the next date of listing, it is provided that the accused applicant is directed to surrender before trial court if he is summoned to face trial for offence in question after filing of the charge sheet. The accused applicant shall be released on bail by the trial court on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court, with the following conditions.

¶18

(i) 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 tamper with the evidence;

¶19

(ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶20

(iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶21

(iv)The applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶22

(v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;

¶23

Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed."

¶24

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that charge sheet in the matter has been filed. He has cooperated in the investigation and he undertakes to cooperate in the trial. He has no criminal antecedent.

¶25

Learned A.G.A.has vehemently opposed the bail application, however, could not dispute the fact that the applicant has no criminal history. He further submits that charge-sheet in the matter has been filed.

¶26

On due consideration to the fact charge sheet in the matter has been filed; the applicant has no criminal history, he has cooperated in the investigation and he shall cooperate in the trial, the interim protection granted by this Court vide order

¶27

dated 10.01.2023 is made absolute in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98 .

¶28

In view of the above, since, charge-sheet in the matter has been filed, the accused applicant is directed to surrender before trial court, if he is summoned to face trial for offence in question. The accused applicant shall be released on bail by the trial court on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶29

¶30

(ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶31

(iii)The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶32

(iv)The applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶33

(v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;

¶34

Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed.

¶35

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

¶36

In view of the aforesaid, the application is allowed .

¶37

Order Date :- 22.7.2024 R.C.

¶38

Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Rajendra Harijan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy.Deptt. of Home and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Harijan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy.Deptt. of Home 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

Chandra Bhan Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Ajeet Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin.Secy. Home Deptt. and Another

Gaurav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Dr. Birendra Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Atul Kulshreshtha Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Angne @ Chhote Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.