Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6822 of 2021 Applicant :- Mohd. Saleem Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mukhtar Alam Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ram Jatan Yadav,Surendra Nath Yadav
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Rejoinder affidavit filed by learned counsel for applicant today, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the first informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and he has not committed any offence. It was stated that in her statement under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., victim girl has stated that she has gone with applicant with her own free will. It was stated that in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she has stated her age as 19 years and that physical relations were not established with applicant. In her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has stated her age 17 years and she has also alleged that she has married with applicant in a temple. It was further stated that as per high school certificate, the age of victim girl is about seventeen and a half years and that victim has refused to undergo medical examination. It has been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 29.10.2020 having no criminal history and that in case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned counsel for the first informant as well as learned A.G.A. have opposed the prayer for bail and argued that as per high school certificate, victim is below 18 years of age and thus, she is a minor girl. It was stated that alleged marriage in temple is not a valid marriage as applicant belongs to Muslim religion and that he is already a married person.
Perusal of record shows that in her statement under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., victim girl has not made any allegation of kidnapping or of rape and she has stated that she has gone with applicant to Mumbai with her own free will and that in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has also stated that she has solemnized the marriage with applicant. As per high school certificate her age is seventeen and a half years.
Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, nature of evidence and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on 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 Mohd. Saleem involved in Case Crime No.794 of 2020, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC & 3/4 POCSO Act and 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act, P.S.Handia, District Prayagraj, be released on bail on furnishing each a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The applicant shall 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 he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is 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 condition, the Court below shall be at liberty to cancel bail of applicant in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 12.8.2021 Neeraj