Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29414 of 2021 Applicant :- Jitesh Ram Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vipul Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Name of Sri Rajendra Kumar Singh learned counsel for the informant has not been shown in the cause list. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed on the record notice of hearing attempted to have been served on Sri Rajendra Kumar Singh. It has been stated that learned counsel for the informant has refused to take notice.
2. List has been revised. None appears for the informant. Accordingly the matter has been proceeded.
3. Heard Sri Vipul Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Ankit Srivastava, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
4. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant - Jitesh Ram with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. - 96 of 2018, under Sections - 376, 363, 366 I.P.C. and Section 5(J)II/(6) POCSO Act, Police Station - Dullahpur, District - Ghazipur, during pendency of trial.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, at present:
(i) as to the delay it has been stated that there was an interim order in the writ proceedings.
(ii) against FIR lodged on 02.9.2018, the applicant is in confinement since 31.5.2021.
(iii) the applicant claims to have cooperated in the investigation. In any case he is not shown to have unduly evaded arrest.
(iv) the applicant has no criminal history.
(v) chargesheet has already been submitted yet trial has not commenced. Therefore, there is no hope of early conclusion of the trial.
(vi) on prima facie basis, only for purpose of grant of bail, it has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the parties have performed marriage and are living together; the victim girl was about 18 years of age on the date of occurrence and she has materially diluted the prosecution allegations in her statement recorded during investigation; further it has been stated that a child has born out of the wedlock between the parties.
(vi) in any case, no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial.
6. In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the final merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail, on his furnishing a personal bond and 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 by intimidating/pressuring the witness, during the investigation or trial.
(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
7. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, the bail being granted shall be cancelled.
8. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 23.12.2021 Faraz