SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Guddu Paswan @ Raghvendra Paswan vs State Of U.P. And Another on 30 September, 2019

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. – 78

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 40828 of 2019

Applicant :- Guddu Paswan @ Raghvendra Paswan

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another

Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhir Kumar Srivastava

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Siddharth,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Guddu Paswan @ Raghvendra Paswan, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.598 of 2019, under Section 354 IPC and 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station Naubasta, District- Kanpur Nagar, during pendency of trial.

Submission is that applicant has been implicated for offence under Section 354 IPC and 7/8 POCSO Act. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that as per Section 27 POCSO Act, medical examination of the child victim is mandatory. There is specific averments made in paragraph No.13 of the affidavit in support of the bail application that medical examination of the child victim was not conducted as per Sectionsection 27 of the aforesaid Act. It casts serious doubt over the alleged incident.The applicant has not criminal history to his credit and he is languishing in jail since 22.6.2019. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant on the basis of the instructions that no medical examination of the victim was conducted. She is minor. The innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, larger mandate of the SectionArticle 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid 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 with the following conditions that :-

1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.

2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.

3. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.

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

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

Order Date :- 30.9.2019

Ruchi Agrahari

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation