Court No. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1630 of 2019 Applicant :- Ajeet Sharma Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Om Narayan Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Brijesh Kumar Solanki
Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
By means of this application the applicant Ajeet Sharma has prayed to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 195 of 2018, u/s 363, 366, 342, 376 I.P.C. & Section 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Usawan, District Budaun.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA representing the State. Perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number of which report was lodged after two weeks. Whereas occurrence was said to be witnesses by two family members of informant, who immediately apprised him about this occurrence. Even then, report was lodged after two days and it was for offence punishable under Section 363 and 366 I.P.C. Prosecutrix was recovered on 4.7.2018, while she was all alone, standing at bus station and in her statement she has said that it was accused applicant who took her upon bike by force. Subsequently, a car was parked, in which three persons were boarding, they were Guddu, Shantanu and his father Omkar, who took her at Punjab, where she was kept in a room. Ajeet used to make physical relationship with her against her wishes. It was accusation against Ajeet for rape. Subsequently, in statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. she developed that it was rape by three persons. Meaning thereby, prosecutrix is inconsistent in her statements recorded under Section 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C. She was held to be of 18 years of age in medical age determination test. It was a consensual fleeing. Hence, bail has been prayed for.
Learned AGA as well as learned private counsel has vehemently opposed the bail application with this contention that as per date of birth recorded in High School certificate, it is December, 2002 i.e. she was about 16 years of age and she, in her statement recorded under Section 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C., has consistently said that she was enticed and taken by force and was subjected to rape by accused persons. Hence, bail be rejected.
Prosecutrix in medical age determination has been held to be of 18 years. She was witnessed by two of her family members at the time while taking on motorcycle but none is said that she was forcibly taken because it was not written in FIR and the FIR was got lodged after two days. In statement recorded under Section 161 of Cr.P.C. accusation of rape was assigned to accused applicant whereas under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. taking by 11 persons by a car and rape by three persons was there. Under all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail with certain conditions.
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant, Ajeet Sharma, involved in above mentioned case crime number be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.
2. The applicant will not indulge in any criminal activity.
3. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate in the trial.
4. The applicant will appear regularly on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless his personal appearance is exempted through counsel by the court concerned.
In the event of breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the court below will be at liberty to proceed to cancel his bail.
Order Date :- 30.4.2019 Kamarjahan