Danish Urf Asif vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2025)

Danish Urf Asif vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Applicant Danish Urf Asif to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned (sureties to be verified before the release order), subject to the five enumerated conditions; breach of any condition to be a ground for cancellation of bail.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant Danish Urf Asif, facing allegations of an attempt on the life of the victim in Case Crime No. 289 of 2022 (Special case No. 711 of 2022) under Sections 307, 324, 354Gha IPC, Sections 11/12 POCSO Act and Section 3(2)5 SC/ST Act, should be released on bail.

Court's answer

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, and keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, force found in the applicant's submissions, the larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the Apex Court judgment in Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement (2024 LawSuit (SC) 677) and 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under-trials, the Court held that the applicant has made out a case for bail and allowed the bail application.

Ratio / Principle

The applicant shall be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, with sureties verified before issuance of the release order, subject to conditions: (i) no tampering with evidence or threatening witnesses; (ii) undertaking not to seek adjournments on dates fixed for evidence when witnesses are present; (iii) remaining present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, personally or as directed; (iv) exposure to proceedings under Section 229-A IPC and, upon misuse of bail and issuance of proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C., under Section 174-A IPC; (v) personal presence at opening of the case, framing of charge and recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.; breach of any condition to be a ground for cancellation of bail.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Siddharth, J.) allows the second bail application (No. 19126 of 2025) of Danish Urf Asif, involved in Case Crime No. 289 of 2022 (Special case No. 711 of 2022), Police Station Kotwali, District Jhansi, under Sections 307, 324, 354Gha IPC, Sections 11/12 POCSO Act and Section 3(2)5 SC/ST Act, for alleged attempt on the life of the victim. The first bail application had been dismissed for want of prosecution (order dated 17.4.2025). At the hearing, the victim stood already examined as P.W.2 supporting the prosecution case, three of seven prosecution witnesses had been examined, the applicant had been in jail since 15.7.2022 and had no criminal history. Granting bail without expressing any opinion on merits, the Court relied on the larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the Apex Court judgment dated 11.07.2022 in Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement (2024 LawSuit (SC) 677) and 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under-trials. Release was ordered on a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount (sureties to be verified before the release order), subject to conditions barring tampering with evidence or threats to witnesses, requiring an undertaking against adjournment-seeking when witnesses are present, personal or directed presence on each fixed date, exposure to Sections 229-A and 174-A IPC and Section 82 Cr.P.C. proceedings on misuse, and personal presence at opening of the case, framing of charge and Section 313 Cr.P.C. recording; breach of any condition to be a ground for cancellation of bail.