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

Dharmendra vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|27 October, 2021
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44234 of 2020 Applicant :- Dharmendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- R.P.S. Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Chandra Bhan Kushwaha,Chandra Bhan Kushwaha.
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the entire record. However no one has appeared on behalf of the first informant despite calling the case in revised list.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No. 353/2019, under Sections 363, 376 IPC & Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, police station Bilsi, District Budaun with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the accused-applicant is innocent and he has not committed any offence. It was submitted that alleged incident of kidnapping has been shown of 06.11.2019 but F.I.R. has been lodged after two days i.e. on 08.11.2019. It was further submitted that besides the applicant, his mother, father and one more family member were also named in the F.I.R. but during investigation, their involvement was not established and except applicant, all the three co-accused persons have been exonerated. Learned counsel has referred the statements of victim girl, recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., as well as her supplementary statement and submitted that all the attending facts and circumstances of the case show that victim was a consenting party. It was also submitted that as per recovery memo, victim was shown recovered from the area of district Badaun, whereas victim has stated that she was recovered by police from district Bareilly. Learned counsel has submitted that victim has also stated that she was taken by applicant to Jamshedpur in the State of Jharkhand by train and she has admitted that she never made any complaint or raised any alarm while travelling or residing with applicant. Learned counsel has also pointed out supplementary statement of victim, wherein she has stated that while she was kept in Bareilly, applicant used to go out during day time and she used to remain alone in the rented room during that period but she never made any complaint. It was further submitted in the medical examination report of the victim, no sign of rape has been shown. It was submitted that as per ossification test, age of victim is 17 years and as per alleged school certificate, her age is 16 years and some months but by giving a margin of two years in her medical certificate, she appears to be a major girl and her statements clearly show that she has gone with applicant with her own free will. It has further been argued that the applicant is in judicial custody since 23.11.2019, having no criminal history and that in case, applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and argued that victim is a minor girl and she has made allegations of rape against the applicant.
Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegations, period of custody and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that a case for bail is made out. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant Dharmendra involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.
3. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The applicant will not try to contact, threat or otherwise influence the complainant or any of the witness of the case.
In case of breach of any of the above condition, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of applicant in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 27.10.2021 Anand
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

Dharmendra vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
27 October, 2021
Judges
  • Raj Beer Singh
Advocates
  • R P S Chauhan