Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20329 of 2018 Applicant :- Arjun Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Pathak,Harshit Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard Sri Anurag Pathak and Sri Harshit Pathak, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.
Contention raised at the Bar is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It has been further submitted that the FIR was registered on 15.01.2018 for the incident, occurred between 10.01.2018 to 15.01.2018, against four named persons, including the name of the applicant- Arjun under sections 363 and 366 IPC with the allegation that the applicant along with the aforesaid three named co-accused enticed away his daughter, while joining his company she took away cash of Rs. 49000/- and other gold and silver valuables with her. The alleged victim returned on 18th January 2018. As per radiological report, the age of the victim was opined to be about 18 years at the relevant point of time. In her statement recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C., the victim while conceding the allegation of taking away the aforesaid cash and valuables stated that there was some infatuation between them and both of them from Saharanpur went to Ambala where they lived as husband and wife in a rented house, copulated with each other. On 14.01.2018 the parents of the applicant assured her that they would get them married very soon and also gifted Rs. 2000/- cash to her but when she returned to Saharanpur Station from Ambala, the applicant left her abondoned and there her parents met, with whom she reached her house. It is further argued that the victim is an intelligent girl and understands enough to understand the meaning of 'consent' while copulating with the applicant prior to the alleged incident, therefore, from her conduct in entirety, she can be deemed to be a consenting party. The applicant is in jail since 25.01.2018, having no criminal antecedents to his credit.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant Arjun, involved in Case Crime No. 28 of 2018, under sections 363, 366-A, 376 IPC and 5/6 of the POCSO Act, P.S. Nanauta, District Saharanpur be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE SHALL NOT SEEK ANY ADJOURNMENT ON THE DATE FIXED FOR EVIDENCE WHEN THE WITNESSES ARE PRESENT IN COURT. IN CASE OF DEFAULT OF THIS CONDITION, IT SHALL BE OPEN FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO TREAT IT AS ABUSE OF LIBERTY OF BAIL AND PASS ORDERS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
(ii) THE APPLICANT SHALL REMAIN PRESENT BEFORE THE TRIAL COURT ON EACH DATE FIXED, EITHER PERSONALLY OR THROUGH HIS COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS PRESENCE PROCLAMATION UNDER SECTION 82 CR.P.C., MAY BE ISSUED AND IF APPLICANT FAILS TO APPEAR BEFORE THE COURT ON THE DATE FIXED IN SUCH PROCLAMATION, THEN, THE TRIAL COURT SHALL INITIATE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST HIM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, UNDER SECTION 174-A IPC.
(iv) 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 CR.P.C. 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.
(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.
However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his bail so granted by this court.
Order Date :- 29.5.2018 shailesh