Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Dipak Paswan vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|27 February, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 22
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7825 of 2018 Applicant :- Dipak Paswan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Shashi Bhushan Kunwar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
According to the prosecution case the F.I.R. was lodged against five accused persons including the applicant, namely, Shyamdev Paswan, Sona Devi, Jhagaru, Gayatri Devi and Deepak alleging that on 22.12.2017 they kidnapped the daughter of complainant Rakesh Paswan, aged about 14 years and compelled her for marriage; the F.I.R. was lodged on 30.12.2017 after eight days of the incident without any explanation.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case; there is no independent witness against the applicant; the prosecutrix is major; in the statement recorded under Sections 164 Cr.P.C. she has stated that she went with the applicant of her own free will and free consent and get married with him; in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial; he is in jail since 31.12.2017 (more than one and half months) having no criminal history.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and admitted that he has received no criminal history against this accused.
Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant Dipak Paswan involved in the Case Crime No. 764 of 2017, under Sections 363, 366, I.P.C. & Section 7/8 of POCSO Act, P.S. Dokati, District Ballia 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 with the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission, of which applicant is suspected.
v) The applicant shall not directly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade the applicant from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 27.2.2018/A. Tripathi
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

Dipak Paswan vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
27 February, 2018
Judges
  • Aniruddha Singh
Advocates
  • Shashi Bhushan Kunwar