Allowed

Deepak v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC27 Jan 2025BAIL/2866/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application under Sections 363, 366, 376, 504 IPC and Sections 3/4 POCSO Act; counsel argued consent and majority of the victim per ossification test. Court granted bail without expressing opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Applicant Deepak released on bail on furnishing personal bond and two sureties, subject to conditions of non-tampering with evidence and presence before trial court on fixed dates.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:33529

¶2

Court No. - 65

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 2866 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Deepak Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.

¶6

List has been revised.

¶7

Learned A.G.A. has informed that notice to the informant has been served on 22.1.2025.

¶8

Heard Sri Vijay Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶9

Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.328 of 2021, under Sections 363, 366, 376, 504 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station- Shahpur, District- Muzaffar Nagar, during the pendency of trial.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The victim is a consenting party as is but evident from her statement recorded U/s 164 Cr.P.C. The victim by her looks seems to be major and as per the ossification test report also her age has come out to be between 18-19 years.

¶11

Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. There is no criminal antecedent of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 17.9.2021 and he is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application.

¶13

In light of the judgement of the Supreme Court passed in Niranjan Singh and another vs Prabhakar Rajaram Kharote and others AIR 1980 SC 785, this Court has avoided detailed examination of the evidence and elaborate documentation of the merits of the case as no party should have the impression that his case has been prejudiced. A prima facie satisfaction of case is needed but it is not the same as an exhaustive exploration of the merits in the order itself.

¶14

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking into consideration the settled law of the Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690 and Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed .

¶15

Let the applicant- Deepak , who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.

¶16

(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.

¶17

(ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C./351 B.N.S.S. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient 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.

¶18

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

¶19

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

¶20

Order Date :- 7.3.2025 Vikas

¶21

(Justice Krishan Pahal)

¶22

Digitally signed by :- VIKAS VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Deepak v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak v. State of U.P. 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

Dilshad vs State of U.P.

Shrawan Kumar Yadav vs State of U.P.

Smt. Narayan Devi vs State of U.P.

Jitendra Paswan vs State of U.P.

Gulab Sankhwar Alias Amarjeet vs State of U.P.

Rati Kumar Paswan Alias Manjey Alias Manjay vs State of U.P.