Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40779 of 2018 Applicant :- Kailash Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Raja Ram Kushwaha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
This is a bail application on behalf of Kailash in connection with Case Crime No.17 of 2018, under Section 376D I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Lalpura, District Hamirpur.
Heard Sri Raja Ram Kushwaha, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri M.P.S.Gaur, learned AGA along with Sri Raj Kumar Yadav,learned counsel on behalf of the State.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the first information report was lodged by the prosecutrix's father. The prosecutrix on a medico legal estimation of her age has been opined to be 19-22 years. The case in the first information report is that on 13.03.2018 at about 2.00 p.m., the informant and his son, saw the applicant put his hands around the victim and he was apprehended by the prosecutrix's brother, Pradeep. The first information report was registered on the basis of allegations that the case is one under Section 354-A I.P.C. and 12 POCSO Act. Learned counsel has emphasized the fact that in the first information report there is no hint of an allegation of rape. It is urged that in the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., the case has been improved alleging the rape by the applicant and co-accused Rahul. It is submitted that the case in the first information report could not have become what it is in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. It is also argued that medical evidence does not support the allegation of rape. It is in the last submitted that co-accused, Rahul against whom there are identical allegation has been admitted to concession of bail vide order dated 18.08.2018 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.30960 of 2018, and, that, the applicant is entitled to bail on the foot of parity.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but does not dispute the factum of parity.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of punishment, the evidence appearing in the case, in particular, grossly discrepant version generically improving the case between the first information report and the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. as also plea of parity order, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.
Let the applicant Kailash involved in Case Crime No.17 of 2018, under Section 376D and 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Lalpura, District Hamirpur be released on bail on 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.
v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the complainant would be free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.
Order Date :- 26.10.2018 R./