SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Rakesh vs State Of U.P. on 20 September, 2019

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. – 78

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 27422 of 2019

Applicant :- Rakesh

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Tufail Hasan

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Siddharth,J.

Counter affidavit filed by learned AGA is taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

Submission is that in para 13 of the bail application, the applicant has made clear averment that there is dispute between the informant and his brother, Kayam Singh. The applicant is living in the house of, Kayam Singh and doing his agricultural work and driving his tractor. On account of proximity of relation-ship with, Kayam Singh, he has been falsely implicated in this case. The child victim has alleged that her underwear was taken off. There is no other allegation against the applicant. In the counter affidavit filed by the State, there is no specific denial of the averment made in para 13 of the affidavit of the bail application. The applicant is in jail since 25.11.2018 and has no criminal history to his credit.

On the other hand learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail.

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted herein 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, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.

Let the applicant, Rakesh, involved in Case Crime No.654 of 2018,, under Sections 354 IPC and 7/8 POCSO Act,, Police Station Sirsaganj, District- Firozabad 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.

1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

2. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

3. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected of the commission of which they are suspected.

5. The applicant 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.

Order Date :- 20.9.2019

SS

 

 

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2021 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