Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Kallu vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|20 December, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 57130 of 2019 Applicant :- Kallu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sharad Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
Submission is that the age of the victim as per medical report is between 16 & half years to 19 years. It has been submitted that the victim willingly eloped with the applicant and went to different places. She is major and has falsely implicated the applicant and his family members in order to protect herself. The Apex Court in the case of Rajak Mohd. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh in Criminal Appeal No.1395 of 2015 vide order dated 23.08.2018 has held that where the prosecutrix lived with the accused and freely moved around with the accused where she came across many people at different points of time but never complained of any criminal act, the conviction of the accused under Section 363, 366, 376 I.P.C was held to be unwarranted in law. The applicant is in jail since 03.06.2017 and has no criminal history to his credit.
On the other hand learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above submissions.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted herein above, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant, Kallu, involved in Case Crime No.271 of 2017, under Sections 363, 366, 372, 376, 323 IPC and under Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Sarnath, District- Varanasi 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which they are accused, or suspected of the commission of which they are suspected.
5. 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 them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.
Order Date :- 20.12.2019 SS
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

Kallu vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
20 December, 2019
Judges
  • Siddharth
Advocates
  • Sharad Kumar