Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
Radha Mohan Alias Raj – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Krishan Pahal, J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Mukesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Arun Kumar Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No. 652 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and Section 4(2) of POCSO Act, Police Station Dibiyapur, District Auraiya, during the pendency of trial.
4. As per prosecution story, the FIR was instituted by the informant against unknown person regarding missing of his daughter aged about 15 years.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. The victim seems to be a consenting party as is but evident from her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The victim by her physical appearance seems to be major, although her age is stated to be 16 years as per ossification test report and a leverage of two years may be granted to the applicant on the upper side.
6. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him.
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 principle of 'Presumption of Innocence Unless Proven Guilty' supports bail as a rule, emphasizing the right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
A prima facie satisfaction for bail is sufficient, emphasizing that consent and absence of criminal antecedents can influence the decision without prejudicing the trial.
The presumption of innocence is paramount in bail applications, reinforcing that bail is a rule and imprisonment is an exception.
Bail is a rule, imprisonment an exception; the right to liberty must be upheld unless substantial grounds justify denial.
The court granted bail based on the victim's consent and lack of injuries, emphasizing the need for careful consideration of allegations and circumstances surrounding the case.
Bail is a rule and imprisonment is an exception; the presumption of innocence must be upheld until proven guilty.
Bail is a rule, not a punishment; the presumption of innocence must be upheld unless proven guilty.
The court emphasized the presumption of innocence and the principle that bail is a rule, while imprisonment is an exception, requiring substantial evidence for denial.
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....
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
