Back
KRISHAN PAHAL
Amarjeet Pandey – Appellant
Versus
State of UP – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Krishan Pahal, J.—List has been revised.
2. Affidavit of compliance filed by learned A.G.A. today, is taken on record.
3. As informed by learned A.G.A., notice to the informant has been served on 4.11.2024.
4. Heard Sri Mrityunjay Singh, learned Advocate holding brief for Sri Devottam Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
5. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 197 of 2024, U/S 137(2), 61(2), 65(1) B.N.S. and 3/4(2) POCSO Act, Police Station Gadwar, District Ballia, during the pendency of trial.
Prosecution Story:
6. The FIR was instituted by the informant stating that his 16-year old daughter had left for college on 10.9.2024 at 9.00 am and did not return till the evening. After taking up frantic search, it was revealed that the applicant in collusion with the co-accused person Rikhimuni Pandey had enticed away his minor daughter.
Arguments on Behalf of the Applicant:
7. The applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. He has nothing to do with the said offence.
8. The
Bail is not to be withheld as a punishment – No one’s life or personal liberty may be taken away unless procedure established by law is followed and procedure must be just and reasonable.
The presumption of innocence and right to liberty under Article 21 mandates that bail should be granted unless there are compelling reasons to deny it, especially in cases lacking substantial evidenc....
(1) POCSO Act was never meant to criminalise consensual romantic relationships between adolescents.(2) Radiology plays a crucial role in modern medicine, serving as backbone for various specialities ....
The court emphasized that the presumption of innocence applies, and bail should be granted unless exceptional circumstances warrant denial, particularly in cases involving misrepresentation of a vict....
Accurate medical age determination is essential in POCSO cases to prevent misuse and ensure justice, impacting bail decisions significantly.
The court emphasized that a prima facie case for bail does not require exhaustive examination of merits, allowing for a margin of error in age assessment based on ossification tests.
The main legal point established was that when educational records exist to determine a minor's age, an ossification test is not necessary, and false assertions can lead to adverse consequences.
The principle of 'Presumption of Innocence Unless Proven Guilty' supports bail as a rule, emphasizing the right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The court emphasized the necessity of accurate age determination in POCSO cases, requiring reasoned medical reports and adherence to statutory provisions for bail applications.
Bail is a rule, imprisonment an exception; the right to liberty must be upheld unless substantial grounds justify denial.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
