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

Kalloo vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|20 September, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35679 of 2018 Applicant :- Kalloo Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Dhirendra Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri Dhirendra Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-Kalloo in Case Crime No.40 of 2018, under Sections 363, 366, 376, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 4 of The Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Chaubepur, District-Kanpur Nagar with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case on account of family dispute by the first informant, who happens to be his Bua. The victim happens to be first cousin of the father of the applicant and she in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. stated that no one had eloped or kidnapped her and she had left her house of her own and she did not make any allegation against the applicant. However, in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she modulated her version which is contradictory to the version set up by her in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. It is argued that the victim has refused for her external and internal examination as noted in the medical report, Annexure-5 to the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. There is no early prospect of conclusion of trial. So, the applicant, who is in jail since 27.03.2018, having no criminal history to his credit, deserves to be released on bail.
Per contra, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not point out anything material to the contrary.
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-Kalloo 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.
Order Date :- 20.9.2018 MN/-
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

Kalloo vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
20 September, 2018
Judges
  • Rajul Bhargava
Advocates
  • Dhirendra Srivastava