Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
SAMEER JAIN, J.
Santosh Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. and Another – Respondents
Criminal Misc. Bail Cancellation Application No.590 of 2023
Decided on : 23-11-2023
Bail Cancellation - Rape - IPC 376(3), 323, 504, 506 and POCSO Act 3/4 - The court considered the statements of the victim, medical report, and relevant materials available on record before granting bail. The court also emphasized the importance of personal liberty and the need for overwhelming circumstances to cancel bail.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant filed a bail cancellation application against the opposite party no.2, who was granted bail in a case involving the rape of the applicant's minor daughter. The applicant argued that the court failed to consider the victim's statements and medical report, while the opposite party no.2 claimed that the allegations were false and the bail was rightly granted.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the bail granting order considered relevant materials available on record and emphasized the importance of personal liberty. It noted that overwhelming circumstances are necessary for bail cancellation and that there were no allegations of threats or tampering with evidence by the accused.
Issues: The main issue was whether the bail granted to the accused should be cancelled based on the non-consideration of the victim's statements and medical report.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for overwhelming circumstances to cancel bail and highlighted the importance of personal liberty. It also noted that the entire material was perused before granting bail and that there were no allegations of threats or tampering with evidence by the accused.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the bail cancellation application, stating that it was devoid of merit and clarified that the observations made had no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.
JUDGMENT :
1. Counter affidavit filed on behalf of opposite party no.2 is taken on record.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant does not propose to file any rejoinder affidavit.
3. Heard Sri Manu Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Suresh Bahadur Singh, learned AGA for the State and Sri Kamaldev Rai, Advocate holding brief of Sri Rajkumar Verma, learned counsel for opposite party no.2.
4. The instant bail cancellation application has been filed on behalf of the applicant with the prayer to cancel the bail of opposite party no.2 already granted by court concerned vide order dated 30.8.2023 in Case Crime No.225 of 2023, under Sections 376(3), 323, 504 and 506 IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Khaga, District Fatehpur.
BRIEF FACTS:
5. FIR of the present case was lodged by the applicant against opposite party no.2 on 17.6.2023 and according to the FIR, on 10.6.2023 at about 5.00 PM in the evening opposite party no.2 enticed away the daughter of applicant aged about 14 years and next day in the morning at about 5.30 AM informant i.e. applicant received a phone call from neghbouring village Gopalpur that his daughter is in the village Gopalpur and thereafter daughter of the informant, i.e., applicant has taken to the Police Station and on the way his daughter informed that opposite party no.2 abducted her and in the jungle he committed rape with her throughout the night.
6. After registration of the FIR, investigation was commenced and during investigation opposite party no.2 was arrested and thereafter he applied for bail before the court concerned. On 30.8.2023 the court concerned granted bail to him.
7. Hence, the instant bail cancellation application.
CONTENTION RAISED ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT.
8. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant is the informant of the case and court concerned granted bail to opposite party no.2 in heinous crime like rape.
9. He further submits that daughter of the applicant was a child below 18 years of age and she in her both the statements recorded under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. categorically stated that opposite party no.2 committed rape with her but in spite of that court concerned enlarged the opposite party no.2 on bail.
10. He further submits that from the perusal of bail granting order dated 30.8.2023 it appears that while granting bail to opposite party no.2 the court concerned did not even consider the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C.
11. He further submits that from the perusal of the medical report of the victim, it appears that she sustained abrasion on left cheek and on both hands and Doctor also opined that there are signs of use of force but the court concerned also did not consider the medical report of the victim and released the opposite party no.2 on bail.
12. He further submits that bail granting order dated 30.8.2023 passed by the court concerned is based on irrelevant facts and court concerned did not consider relevant materials available on record.
13. He further submits that the court concerned wrongly interpreted the judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of Union of India Vs. K.A.Najib, AIR 2021 SC 12 and Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and others (Manu/SC/0851/2022).
14. He further submits that in both these cases the Apex Court never opined that in serious offences like rape even without considering the statements of the victim recorded during investigation and without considering her medical report, bail should be granted.
15. He further submits that considering the seriousness of allegation made against opposite party no.2 and non-consideration of relevant material available on record, bail granted to opposite party no. 2 should be cancelled.
SUBMISSIONS MADE ON BEHALF OF THE STATE:
16. Learned AGA appearing on behalf of the State also submitted that it is a case of rape upon the minor girl, who was child under the provisions of POCSO Act and she in her both the st
The judgment emphasizes the importance of personal liberty and the need for overwhelming circumstances to cancel bail, highlighting the careful consideration of relevant materials before granting bai....
The court has the authority to cancel bail if the order suffers from serious infirmities resulting in miscarriage of justice, and if the accused misuses their liberty, interferes with the investigati....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that while granting bail, the gravity of the crime, character of the evidence, and the presumption of guilt under relevant acts should be considere....
Bail in serious offenses must consider all relevant evidence, especially victim statements, to prevent miscarriage of justice.
Bail may be canceled when an accused violates conditions, especially if such violations threaten the integrity of a fair trial, as established by precedents.
Recall of bail – Impending marriage of accused is not a ground for grant of bail.
Bail cannot be granted in sexual assault cases against minors without significant scrutiny of charges and evidence; serious errors by the High Court necessitated cancellation.
The main legal point established is that the court will consider supervening circumstances or conduct of the accused post bail to justify cancellation, and will require evidence of violation of bail ....
(1) Bail – Mere filing of charge-sheet does not, by itself, preclude consideration of application for bail.(2) Bail granted without due consideration of material factors warrants interference – In of....
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
