The Allahabad High Court has granted conditional bail to the accused in a rape and POCSO Act case.
A single-justice bench of Justice Krishna Pahal passed this order while hearing a Criminal Misc Bail Application filed by Ankit@ Subhash.
The applicant sought bail in Case under Sections 363, 376 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, 2012, Police Station Dhampur, District Bijnor, during the pendency of trial.
The FIR was instituted by the informant stating that his daughter was missing since 4.12.2023 at 5.00 pm.
Counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimise him. He has nothing to do with the said offence.
The FIR is delayed by seven days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused.
Counsel for the applicant further submitted that by her looks, the victim seems to be major, although, as per Class 6th certificate, her date of birth is 1.2.2009, as such, the said document is not admissible in the Indian Evidence Act in light of Section 94 of The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015.
The medical report does not corroborate the prosecution story.
Counsel for the applicant also submitted that the statement of the victim recorded u/s 164 CrPC indicates her consent, as she had gone with the applicant all the way to Delhi and remained there.
Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length.
Counsel for the applicant said that there is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 16.12.2023. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
The Court observed,
The well-known principle of “Presumption of Innocence Unless Proven Guilty,” gives rise to the concept of bail as a rule and imprisonment as an exception.
A person’s right to life and liberty, guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution, cannot be taken away simply because the person is accused of committing an offence until the guilt is established beyond a reasonable doubt. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution states that no one’s life or personal liberty may be taken away unless the procedure established by law is followed, and the procedure must be just and reasonable.
The said principle has been recapitulated by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors, 2022 INSC 690.
Reiterating the aforesaid view the Supreme Court in the case of Manish Sisodia Vs Directorate of Enforcement 2024 INSC 595 has again emphasised that the very well-settled principle of law that bail is not to be withheld as a punishment is not to be forgotten. It is high time that the Courts should recognize the principle that “bail is a rule and jail is an exception”.
“AGA could not bring forth any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the applicant.
It is settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused at the trial. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by AGA.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, the statement of the victim recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail,” the Court further observed while allowing the bail application.
The Court ordered that,
Let the applicant Ankit @ Subhash involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.
(ii) 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 CrPC. 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 default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
The post Allahabad High Court grants bail to man accused in rape, POCSO case appeared first on India Legal.