Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
It is contented by the learned counsel for the applicant that according to the prosecution case, prosecutrix aged about 15 years was kidnapped by three accused persons including applicant on 17.4.2011 at about 9 p.m. whereas the report was lodged on 21.4.2011 at about 9.10 hours and on the same date after lodging the F.I.R., prosecutrix was recovered and her statement was recorded. In her statements there was contradiction. In her statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. she did not name the accused-applicant while in her statements recorded under Sections 164 Cr.P.C., she told the name of accused-applicant and co-accused Navichandra.
Learned counsel for the applicant has further contended that in this case co-accused Kaushal Kumar has been granted bail by another bench of this Court.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail of the accused-applicant, but did not explain factual aspect of the contradiction in the statements.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I find that it is a fit case for bail. He is behind the bar since 1.5.2011.
Let the applicant Bachchoo Lal @ Ranjeet involved in case Crime No. 125 of 2011 under sections 363,366,376 I.P.C. P.S. Nawabganj, District Farrukhabad be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
Order Date :- 23.11.2011 AHN