Disposed

Vinod Kumar @ Rajauwa and Another v. State of Up and 3 Others

Allahabad HC26 Jul 2024ABAIL/6949/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in a case involving Sections 363, 376D, 342, 506, 120B IPC and POCSO Sections 5/6 and 16/17. Applicants sought bail citing parity with co-accused already granted anticipatory bail. Court granted anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial with conditions including cooperation with investigation, no inducement or threat, surrender of passport,

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on personal bond of Rs.50,000 with two sureties each.

Vinod Kumar @ Rajauwa and Another vs State… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:119610

¶2

Court No. - 66

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 6949 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Vinod Kumar @ Rajauwa And Another Opposite Party :- State Of Up And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Diwakar Tiwari,Gyanendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶6

1.Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.

¶7

This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No.455 of 2022, under Sections 363, 376D, 342, 506, 120B IPC and Section 5/6 read with section 16/17 POCSO Act, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Banda.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case just to harass the applicants. It has further submitted that the co-accused Smt. Kaushilya, Neelam, Km. Ragini and Indrajeet @ Jeet and Vinod Dubey have already been granted anticipatory bail vide orders dated 23.4.2024 and 28.5.2024 in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/S 438 Cr.P.C. Nos. 3725 of 2024 and 5067 of 2024. It has further submitted that co-accused Ankit Tiwari has already been granted regular bail passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 56504 of 2022 vide order dated 27.9.2023. There is no criminal history of the applicant no. 1 and so for as the applicant no. 2 is concerned, he has criminal history of three cases and out of which in one case, the final report has been submitted and remaining two cases relates to the NCR, therefore the applicants are also entitled to pre- arrest bail on the ground of parity. The applicants are having no previous criminal history.

¶9

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicants but could not dispute with the aforesaid facts.

¶10

Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicants, they are directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC

¶11

Online SC 98. The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.

¶12

In the event of arrest, the applicants shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicants - Vinod Kumar @ Rajauwa and Ranjeet @ Chunnu involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶13

(i) The applicants shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation.

¶14

(ii) The applicants 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.

¶15

(iii) The applicants shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

¶16

(iv) The applicants shall surrender their passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.

¶17

(v) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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 to ensure presence of the applicant.

¶18

(vi) In case, the applicants misuses the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.

¶19

(vii) The applicants 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and

¶20

proceed against his in accordance with law.

¶21

In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/ Investigating Officer/ first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.

¶22

With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application stands disposed of.

¶23

Order Date :- 26.7.2024/A.

¶24

Digitally signed by :- AFAQ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vinod Kumar @ Rajauwa and Another v. State of Up and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Kumar @ Rajauwa and Another v. State of Up 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

Amar Singh vs State of U.P. and Another

Deepti Khamaru vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Sarita Garg vs State of Up and Another

Mamta vs State of U.P. and Another

Mustafa vs State of U.P. and Another

X Minor vs State of U.P.