Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9567 of 2018 Applicant :- Kalika Prasad Singh @ K.P. Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Swati Agrawal,Vijay Bahadur Shivhare Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sudhakar Yadav
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri Swati Agrawal, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sudhakar Yadav, learned counsel for the informant and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-Kalika Prasad Singh @ K.P. Singh in Case Crime No.1226 of 2017, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and 3/4 of The Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Badlapur, District-Jaunpur with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that as per the high school certificate the prosecutrix is aged 17 years and 11 years i.e. she is at the verge of attaining majority and she is student of B.Com first year. It is argued that the prosecutrix on her recovery after 19 days of incident in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. stated that she is student of B.Com. first year and she had gone with the applicant to Mumbai by Flight. Apprehending that they would be caught, they stayed at different places in Mumbai. She has stated that when they came back to Jaunpur, they were nabbed by the police. She has denied that she has been enticed away by the applicant. She has also stated that she had gone voluntarily of own freewill. However, it appears that in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she, under coercion of her father, entirely changed her earlier version and alleged that the applicant had raped her in Mumbai. She also admitted that she stayed with him for about 19 days. It is also pointed out that the prosecutrix refused for her internal medical examination and had signed on the note made by the doctor. There is no early prospect of conclusion of trial. So, the applicant, who is in jail since 12.12.2017, having no criminal history to his credit, deserves to be released on bail.
Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submitted that the applicant is a married man and in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. the prosecutrix has levelled specific allegation of rape against the applicant. However, they could not dispute the material contradictions in the version set up by the prosecutrix under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C.
Learned counsel for the informant has submitted that the trial has already begun. Therefore, the trial court may be directed to decide the trial within a stipulated period.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let applicant-Kalika Prasad Singh @ K.P. Singh 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.
However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial of aforesaid case and conclude the same in accordance with law without granting unnecessary adjournments to either of the parties as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.
Order Date :- 27.7.2018 MN/-