Jitendra Sonkar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Court No. - 66 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43859 of 2023 Applicant :- Jitendra Sonkar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J. Shri Paritosh Kumar Malviya, learned AGA-I for the State contends that the police authorities in compliance of the directions issued by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 46998 of 2020 (Junaid Vs State of U.P. and another) reported at 2021 (6) ADJ 511 and with a view to implement the provisions of POCSO Act, 2012 read with POCSO Rules, 2020, have served notices of the bail application upon the the victim as well as the CWC. By means of the bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Special Trial No.103 of 2021 arising out of Case Crime No.127 of 2021 at Police Station-Mubarakpur, District-Azamgarh under Sections 504, 506, 376 IPC and Section 5/6 of the POCSO Act. The applicant is in jail since 19.06.2021. The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned trial court on 24.05.2022. The following arguments made by Shri Vivek Kumar Singh, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Shri Paritosh Kumar Malviya, learned AGA-I from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:

¶1The applicant is a law abiding citizen who cooperated in the investigation and has joined the trial proceedings. The applicant never tampered with the evidence nor did he influence any witness.

¶2The victim has already been examined by the learned trial court.

¶3Various exculpatory factors in the evidence was drawn and marshelled in the arguments.

¶4However, this Court will not like to go further into appraisal of evidence as it might prejudice the trial.

¶5Continued incarceration of the applicant will disable him from framing an effective defence strategy, gathering evidence in his support thereof and tendering the same before the learned trial court to absolve himself.

¶6The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case.

¶7The applicant is not a flight risk. The applicant being a law abiding citizen has always cooperated with the investigation and undertakes to cooperate with the court proceedings. There is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending. This Court in Prabhat Gangwar v. State of U.P. (Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.2586 of 2023) while considering the grant of enlarging an accused on bail for preparing his defence and gathering evidence to tender the same before the learned trial court for establishing his innocence held: "Nature and gravity of the offence is certainly liable to be considered by the court while considering grant of bail. The Court has also to factor the likelihood of whether the accused committed the offence while deciding a bail application. The court also has to determine in the facts of the case whether the accused needs to be set at liberty to frame his defence and gather evidence to refute the prosecution case and establish his innocence. The bail court has to examine whether continued incarceration would disable the accused from tendering an effective defence of his case. This is a demand of processual fairness in criminal jurisprudence. Setting an accused at liberty at large on this ground cannot be applied mechanically in all cases. The issue has to be considered in the facts and circumstances of each case while doing so. All relevant facts including the evidences in the record, the conduct of the accused during the investigation as well as trial have to be adverted to before a decision is made in this regard."

Considering the aforesaid parameters in light of the above facts of this case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled for bail. In wake of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant-Jitendra Sonkar be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on 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 or influence any witness during the trial.

(ii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. Order Date :- 16.10.2023 Ashish Tripathi High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad