ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
AJAY BHANOT
PAWAN – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
BAIL/42771/2021
BAIL - POCSO ACT - AGE OF VICTIM - MEDICAL EXAMINATION
Fact of the Case:
The applicant was arrested and charged under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC, and Sections 3/4 of the POCSO Act for allegedly kidnapping, abducting, and raping a minor girl. The applicant's bail application was rejected by the lower court.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the applicant's bail application, holding that he was entitled to be released on bail.
Issues: 1. Whether the applicant was falsely implicated in the case.2. Whether the victim was a minor at the time of the alleged incident.3. Whether the applicant was entitled to bail.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court noted that there were material contradictions in the victim's statements under Section 161 CrPC and Section 164 CrPC.2. The court also noted that the medical report recorded the victim's age as about 16 years, but the applicant's counsel contended that the victim was a major and that appropriate medical examination for determining her age had not been conducted.3. The court further noted that the applicant did not have any criminal history apart from this case.
Final Decision: The court allowed the applicant's bail application and ordered his release on bail on the condition that he would not tamper with the evidence, influence any witness, or make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case.
Court No. - 66
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 42771
of 2021
Applicant :- Pawan
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
Heard Shri Anil Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the
applicant, and learned AGA for the State.
A first information report was lodged against the
applicant as Case Crime No. 101 of 2021 (Case No. 945
of 2021) at Police Station Rohata, District Meerut,
under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 of
POCSO Act.
The bail application of the applicant was rejected by
learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge
(POCSO Act), Meerut, on 14.09.2021.
The applicant is in jail since 12.07.2021, pursuant to the
said F.I.R.
Shri Anil Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the
applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely
implicated in the instant case. There are material
contradictions in the statements of the victim under
Section 161 Cr.P.C. and Section 164 Cr.P.C. The victim
was infact in a relationship with the applicant. In the
statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. the victim asserted
that she eloped with the applicant and accompanied
with him at various places of her own volition. Further
she has stated that she agreed to accompany the
applicant to Faridabad at his insistence. The later
implicatory statement was given under pressure of her
parents who wanted to save their false notion of family
honour. In the medical report, the age of the victim is
recorded as about 16 years. However, Shri Anil Kumar
Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant contends that
the victim is a major and appropriate medical
examination for determining her age has not been
conducted. Apart from this case, the applicant does not
have criminal history. Lastly it is submitted by learned
counsel for applicant that the applicant shall not
abscond, and will fully cooperate in the criminal law
proceedings. The applicant shall not tamper with the
evidence nor influence the witnesses in any manner.
Shri Nafees Ahmad, learned AGA for the State could
not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions
from the record. Learned AGA could not dispute the
fact that the applicant does not have any criminal
history apart from this case.
Courts have taken notice of the overcrowding of jails
during the current pandemic situation (Ref.: Suo Motu
Writ Petition (c) No. 1/2020, Contagion of COVID 19
Virus in prisons before the Supreme Court of India).
These circumstances shall also be factored in while
considering bail applications on behalf of accused
persons.
I see merit in the submissions of learned counsel for the
applicant and accordingly hold that the applicant is
entitled to be enlarged on bail.
In the light of the preceding discussion and without
making any observations on the merits of the case, the
bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant- Pawan be released on bail in Case
Crime No. 101 of 2021 (Case No. 945 of 2021) at
Police Station Rohata, District Meerut, under Sections
363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act, on
his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in
the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below.
The following conditions be imposed in the interest of
justice:-
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence
during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.
(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on
the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted
with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from
disclosing such facts to the Court to any police officer
or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above condition, the
prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation
application before this Co
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.