Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 24748 of 2018 Applicant :- Dhruv Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ajit Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri Ajit Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.201 of 2018, under Sections 376, 364, 342 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Sikandra Rao, District Hathras, with the prayer to release him on bail.
Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. In the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the prosecutrix disclosed her age to be 18 years. It is argued that the prosecutrix was married about one year back. However, she was having affair with the applicant. The first information report was lodged after two days of the incident. In the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she has only named the applicant who is alleged to have taken her on a motorcycle forcibly and then took her to unknown place and committed rape by the applicant. In the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she has alleged that when she was attending call of nature, the applicant and co-accused Udaiveer forcibly abducted and committed rape. It is argued that the version of rape is not supported by medical evidence and the first information report was lodged after two days of the incident. It is submitted that the applicant is in custody since 22.3.2018.
Learned AGA vehemently opposed the bail and submitted that as per the medical report, the age of prosecutrix is 15 years. However, he could not dispute that the prosecutrix herself disclosed her age to be 18 years in the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and there are material contradictions between the statements under Section 161 & 164 Cr.P.C.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made, without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let applicant Dhruv Kumar, 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 following conditions that :-
(1) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;
(2) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;
(3) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial Court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the Courts below shall be at liberty to cancel bail of the applicant.
Considering the fact that it is a case of rape, in view of the provisions of Apex Court, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial and conclude the same without granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, on day to day basis, strictly in accordance with the provisions of Section 309(1) Cr.P.C., preferably within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of the order.
Let a copy of this order be sent to concerned Court below for intimation and necessary compliance within a week.
Order Date :- 30.7.2018 Hasnain