Court No. - 28
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31961 of 2019 Applicant :- Kapil Tyagi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajendra Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anurag Upadhyay
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
1. Heard Mr. Rajendra Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and Mr. Anurag Upadhyay, learned counsel for the complainant.
2. This application for bail has been filed by applicant-Kapil Tyagi seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.237 of 2019 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 376, 506 I.P.C. P.S.-
Murad Nagar, District-Ghaziabad, during the pendency of the trial.
3. Perused the record.
4. In respect of criminality committed by the applicant-Kapil Tyagi, an F.I.R. dated 16.03.2019 was lodged by the victim-Priti Chaudhary, which was registered as Case Crime No. 0237 of 2019 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 376, 506 I.P.C. P.S.-
Murad Nagar, District-Ghaziabad.
5. It has come on the record that date of birth of the victim as per her High School Certificate is 01.07.1998. As per allegations made in the F.I.R., it is alleged that the applicant has misused the victim and has taken a large amount of money from her for getting her employed in a government service. In the bail rejection order passed by the Court below, a point has been demonstrated that the applicant has given a Cheque of Rs. 23, 47,000/- to the mother of the victim in view of the amount so taken by the applicant from the victim but the said Cheque has not been encashed on account of insufficient funds.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant and the victim are known to each other. Since the school days, the applicant and the victim were accompanying and travelling to various places therefore, the victim is a consenting party. On the aforesaid factual premise, he submits that the applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail.
7. Per contra, the learned AGA and the learned counsel appearing for the complainant have opposed the prayer for bail. They invited the attention of the Court to the bail rejection order passed by the Court below and on the basis of the facts contained therein as well as the findings recorded therein, they submit that no case for bail has been found.
8. Having heard the learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State, learned counsel appearing for the complainant and upon consideration of nature of allegations as well as the complicity of the applicant but without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that no case for bail is made out.
9. Accordingly, the present bail application of the applicant is hereby rejected.
Order Date :- 21.8.2019 YK