Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2024 Supreme(All) 191

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
SHEKHAR KUMAR YADAV, J.
Arjun Paswan – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. And Others – Respondents
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.29952 of 2023
Decided on : 03-01-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Ajeet Kumar Singh
For the Respondent: Pramod Kumar

The court's decision to grant bail was based on the consideration of the nature of allegations and the arguments advanced by the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case.

Headnote:
Bail Application - Enlargement on Bail - The court granted bail to the applicant, Arjun Paswan, in a case involving allegations of enticing away a minor daughter and solemnizing marriage under Sections 363, 366-A, 376(3) I.P.C., Section 3/4 POCSO Act. The court considered the nature of allegations and the arguments advanced by the parties, finding it to be a fit case for granting bail.
Fact of the Case:
The bail application was filed on behalf of the applicant in a case involving allegations of enticing away a minor daughter and solemnizing marriage under Sections 363, 366-A, 376(3) I.P.C., Section 3/4 POCSO Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, found it to be a fit case for granting bail and ordered the release of the applicant on bail with specific conditions.
Issues: The issues involved the applicant's innocence, alleged false implication, and the nature of the allegations against him.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the facts and circumstances of the case, perused the record, and also considered the nature of allegations and arguments advanced by the parties in granting bail to the applicant.
Final Decision: The court granted bail to the applicant, Arjun Paswan, subject to specific conditions and made it clear that the observations made in granting bail shall not affect the trial judge's independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.

JUDGMENT :

1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant today in the Court, the same is taken on record.

2. Heard Sri Ajeet Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Dharmendra Kumar, Advocate holding brief of Sri Pramod Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A for the State of U.P. as well as perused the record.

3. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.198 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366-A, 376(3) I.P.C., Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station-Dubhar, District-Ballia with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

4. As per allegation, on 27.12.2022, the minor daughter of informant aged about 15 years did not return at home from her school and on being searched, the informant came to know that the applicant enticed away his minor daughter.

5. The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case. As per the high school certificate, date of birth of the victim is 5.8.2006 and on the date of incident, the victim was more than 16 years of age. He submitted that the incident took place on 27.12.2022 where FIR was lodged on 30.12.2022 and the victim was recovered on 14.1.2023. He submitted that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has stated that she went to Madrash with the applicant and solemnized marriage with the applicant on her own sweet will and as such, no offence as alleged in the impugned FIR is made out against the applicant. He further submitted that as per the medical examination report, there is no internal or external injury was found on the body of the victim. The applicant has criminal history of one case in which the applicant is already on bail. The applicant is in jail since 17.1.2023. He submitted that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

6. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he has not disputed the above contention made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.

8. Let the applicant-Arjun Paswan, 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.

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in Court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him/her under Section 229-A IPC.

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the Trial Court shall initiate proceedings against him/her, in accordance with law, under Section 174A IPC.

(iv) 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. 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

Click Here to Read the rest of this document