Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Arman @ Chidda vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|28 February, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 66
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3790 of 2019 Applicant :- Arman @ Chidda Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Satendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for applicant, the learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
Applicant- Arman @ Chidda seeks bail in Case Crime No. 399 of 2018, under Sections 354, 354-B IPC and Section 8 of POCSO Act, P.S. Bagvala, District- Etah.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Learned counsel for the applicant has next drawn the attention of the Court to the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., in which absolutely no role has been assigned to the applicant and he is only said to be sitting in the tempo. On being questioned, she has categorically stated that the applicant has not committed any indecent act with her, however in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. the victim has stated that the applicant also pulled her and tried to disrobe her. Thus, there is sharp contradiction in the statements of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. so far as the applicant is concerned. Lastly, it is submitted that applicant is in jail since 15.11.2018 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial by all means. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit.
Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the fact that the applicant is in jail since 15.11.2018 and has no criminal history to his credit.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let applicant Arman @ Chidda be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions :-
(i) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity.
(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
(iv) The applicant shall regularly appear on the dates fixed by the trial court unless his personal attendance is exempted by the trial court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, it will be open to the opposite parties to approach the Court for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 28.2.2019 KU
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

Arman @ Chidda vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
28 February, 2019
Judges
  • Rajiv Gupta
Advocates
  • Satendra Singh