Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2021
  6. /
  7. January

Alok Rajbhar @ Alok vs State Of U P And Another

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|29 July, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19294 of 2021 Applicant :- Alok Rajbhar @ Alok Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Suraj Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Arvind Kumar Singh,Vinod Shankar Tripathi
Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
Heard over bail application moved by applicant, Alok Rajbhar @ Alok, in Case Crime No. 782 of 2020, under Sections-363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and 3/4 Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, Police Station-Lanka, District-Varanasi.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the accused- applicant is innocent; he has been falsely implicated in this very case crime number and is languishing in jail since 19.01.2021; he is of no criminal antecedent and there is no likelihood of fleeing from course of justice or tempering with evidence in case of release on bail. First information report was got lodged against unknown regarding missing of the prosecutrix; prosecutrix in her statement under Sections 161 as well as 164 Cr.P.C. has said to have been with the applicant at Lucknow and Delhi without any protest and physical relation was there with after marriage in between; she was voluntarily came with the applicant at Varanasi while being examined as P.W.-1, before the trial Court, she has not supported the case of prosecution; entire accusation has been denied by her. Hence, bail has been prayed for.
Learned AGA has vehemently opposed, but could not oppose this fact that the applicant is of no criminal antecedent.
Having heard and gone through materials placed on record, it is apparent that prosecutrix has been held to be of 16 to 17 years in medical age determination by medical board which may be with variation of two years either way; she was said to be in relation; she in her statements, under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. as well as in her testimony before trial Court has not supported the accusation.
Considering all above facts and circumstances, the nature of accusations, severity of the punishment in the case of conviction and nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness and prima facie case, but, without commenting on merits of the case, a case for bail is made out.
Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant, Alok Rajbhar @ Alok, 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.
5. The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court, Allahabad.
6. The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by counsel of the party concerned.
7. The concerned Court/ Authority/ Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court, Allahabad, and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
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 :- 29.7.2021 Deepak/
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Alok Rajbhar @ Alok vs State Of U P And Another

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
29 July, 2021
Judges
  • Ram Krishna Gautam
Advocates
  • Suraj Kumar Singh