Disposed

Vimal v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and 3 Others

Allahabad HC20 Nov 2024BAIL/11145/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a second bail application under the POCSO Act and IPC, the High Court remanded the matter to the trial court to record evidence of specific eyewitnesses and expert witnesses urgently, directing coercive action if they fail to appear, before considering the bail.

What did the court decide?

Trial Court directed to record evidence of specific witnesses with expedition and fix short dates.

Vimal vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 11

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11145 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Vimal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Brijesh Kumar,Shiv Sinha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Shri Shiv Sinha, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Arun Kumar Verma, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶7

This is second bail application of the applicant. The First Bail Application of the applicant bearing Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.741 of 2024 has been dismissed/rejected by a co-ordinate Bench (Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Bhatia) of this Court vide order dated 20.08.2024 and since the Hon'ble Judge, who has rejected the first bail application, has released this bail application, therefore, it has been listed before this court.

¶8

As per learned counsel for the applicant, the present applicant is languishing in jail since 11.09.2022, in Case Crime No.0660/2022, under Section 376 D.A. I.P.C. and Section 5G/6 of POCSO Act, at Police Station - Mohammadi, District - Kheri.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has pointed out that the evidence of informant Avanish, eye witness Smt. Usha Devi and Narvir as well as of the victim/prosecutrix has been recorded. He has further submitted that co-accused Nikhil alias Nikhil Kumar has been granted bail by this Court on 28.08.2024, passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.5494 of 2024. The consideration to grant bail to the said co-accused Nikhil alias Nikhil Kumar was that the statement of prosecutrix does not support the prosecution version properly.

¶10

On being asked as to whether all relevant witnesses/witnesses of fact as well as expert witnesses have been examined, Shri Arun Kumar Verma, learned A.G.A. has informed the court that except one eye witness Vandana and expert witnesses Dr. Alok Kumar and Dr. Archana, all other relevant/witnesses of fact have been examined.

¶11

Considering the aforesaid facts, I find it proper that the evidence of eye witness Vandana, expert witnesses Dr. Alok Kumar and Dr. Archana be recorded with expedition, so that, the present bail application could be disposed of on the next date.

¶12

Accordingly, the learned trial court concerned is directed to record the evidence of eye witness Vandana, expert witnesses Dr. Alok Kumar and Dr. Archana with expedition by fixing short dates and if possible, on day-to-day basis, as this matter relates to POCSO Act and if the aforesaid prosecution witnesses do not cooperate in the trial proceedings, any appropriate coercive steps may be taken by the learned trial court to ensure that the evidence of aforesaid persons/witnesses be recorded with expedition.

¶13

List this case on 9th January, 2025, within top ten cases.

¶14

Liberty is given to the learned counsel for the applicant to make a mention to take up this case out of turn.

¶15

Let the trial court be informed about this order through the District Judge, District Lakhimpur Kheri by the Registry of this Court within three working days for its compliance.

¶16

On the next date, if the evidence of aforesaid witnesses is recorded, copy thereof may be placed before the court.

¶17

Learned trial court concerned is also directed to inform this Court about the current status of the trial by the next date.

¶18

(Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.)

¶19

Order Date :- 12.12.2024 ML/-

¶20

Digitally signed by :- MUNNA LAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Vimal v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vimal v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mukesh Kumar Bharti Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Govt. Lko. and Another

Ram Mohit Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Praveen Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Ranveer Singh @ Banti Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Radhey Shyam vs Union of India. Thru. Home Secy. and 2 Others

Sonu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko