Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38835 of 2018 Applicant :- Harit Gurjar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pushpendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vinod Singh
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Pushpendra Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
This bail application has been filed by the applicant Harit Gurjar, seeking his enlargement on bail in S.T. No. 3121 of 2018 (State Vs. Harit Gurjar and others) pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Court No. 8, Bulandshahr arising out of Case Crime No. 137 of 2018 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 364, 307, 511, 452, 323, 352, 376, IPC, 7 Criminal Law Amendment and 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Aurangabad, District Bulandshahr during the pendency of the trial.
In respect of an incident which occurred on 22.3.2018 at 2:00 am, an F.I.R. dated 22.3.2018 was lodged by Ravi Kumar. In the aforesaid F.I.R., the present applicant was nominated as a named accused. There were four others who were nominated as unnamed accused. A perusal of the first information report dated 22.3.2018 will go to show that the specific role is assigned to the present applicant. The occurrence has taken place in the house of the first informant and that too at 2:00 am.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that though the applicant is named in the F.I.R. but the applicant is innocent. The applicant has love affair with the daughter of the first informant and the daughter had herself called the present applicant, pursuant to which the applicant visited the house of the applicant. Reliance is placed upon the letter of the first informant as well as the photograph of the applicant that the daughter of the first informant had love affair with the present applicant. He, thus submits that the applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail.
Learned A.G.A. as well as the learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the prayer for bail. They submit that the daughter of the first informant is a minor. According to the date of birth of the daughter of the first informant as recorded in the High School certificate, she is minor as her date of birth is 26.3.2002. Placing reliance upon Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, it is urged that the applicant being the minor and in view of availability of the High School certificate, the medical evidence relating to age of the applicant becomes irrelevant. It is further urged that the consent of a minor will not render the criminality alleged against the applicant a nullity. It is thus urged that the the present applicant does not merit any indulgence of this court and therefore, the bail application of the appliacant is liable to be rejected.
Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants, the learned A.G.A. for the State and upon perusal of the material brought on the record and the complicity of the applicants but without making any comments on the merits of the case, I do not find any good reason to exercise my discretion in favour of the accused applicant. Thus, the bail application of the present applicants stands rejected.
However, the trial court is expected to gear up the trial of the aforesaid case and conclude the same within a period of six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, in accordance with law, without granting any unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties, provided the applicant fully cooperates in conclusion of the trial, if there is no other legal impediment.
Office is directed to transmit a certified copy of this order to the court concerned within a fortnight.
Order Date :- 28.11.2018 Arshad