Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3078 of 2017 Applicant :- Chhote Shah & Anr.
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Pati Tiwari,Sudarshan Singh,Vijaya Shankar Shukla,Vikas Rana Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
Heard Sri Vikas Rana, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Kamal Singh Yadav, learned AGA for the State.
This is an application for bail on behalf of Chhote Shah and Chhota @ Rahamat Ali in Case Crime No. 547 of 2015, under Sections 363, 366, 376(D), 342 IPC and Section 6 of POCSO Act, P.S. Faridpur, District Bareilly.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated; that the facts are absolutely different from what they have been portrayed in the first information report; that the victim has neither been taken away nor ravished by the applicant in any manner; that rather as would appear from the G.D. Entry No. 47 annexed at page 40 to the paper book the deceased travelled herself from Bareilly to Delhi and finding herself lost made it to P.S. Paharganj, wherefrom she was produced before the Child Welfare Committee, Delhi where she has given a very detailed statement, a copy of which is annexed as Annexure No.7 to the affidavit; that in the said statement she said that she was ill treated by her mother and therefore she left her home to go over to her sister at Panipat but in inadvertently she boarded another train, which landed her in Delhi, where she lost her way and made it to P.S. Paharganj; that there is also on record filed along with the counter affidavit of the State the restoration order passed by the Child Welfare Committee (Central Dehli) (Bench of Magistrates) Phase-1, Delhi dated 07.11.2015 where the applicant was produced by the police, who summoned her father and handed over her custody to him with the direction to produce her before the Child Welfare Committee, Bareilly; that in the submission of the learned counsel the story given out by the victim before the police at Paharganj and the Child Welfare Committee, Delhi runs counter to her version in the FIR and her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. which does not speak a word about the applicants giving her any intoxicant and putting her to sleep and thereafter kidnapping her or ravishing her as she has said in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C.
It is further submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the aforesaid facts cause a serious clue of doubt on the prosecution story. He has further pointed out that trial has commenced where the father of the victim has not supported the prosecution story and has been declared hostile.
The learned AGA, however, has opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that the present case involves a matter that relates to crime against women, which is in contemporary time a big social menace and in the statement of the of the victim under section 164 Cr.P.C. the stand of the applicant is very categorical and inculpatory; it cannot be sidelined on the basis of statements made to authorities in proceeding that are not so solemn. As such, the applicants are not entitled to the indulgence of bail.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations, the gravity of the offence, the evidence on record, in particular, the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court does not find it to be a fit case for bail at this stage. The bail application stands rejected at this stage.
However, looking to the fact that the applicants are in jail for a period of one an half years as under trial and PW-1 has already been examined, where one more witnesses of fact besides the formal witnesses remain to be examined, it is directed that the trial pending before the concerned court below be concluded within three months next from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order on day to day basis.
It is made clear that in case the witnesses are not appearing, the concerned court shall initiate necessary coercive measures to ensure their presence positively.
Let a copy of the order be certified to the court concerned for strict compliance.
The first informant Chhiddu and the prosecutrix are present in Court in compliance with the orders dated 08.02.2018 and 19.02.2018. It goes without saying that their presence is not required any further.
Order Date :- 23.2.2018 Imroz