Court No. - 46
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26608 of 2016 Applicant :- Mukhtar Khan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Karunesh Narayan Tripathi,Manoj Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Naheed Ara Moonis,J.
Counter affidavit filed on behalf of State is taken on record.
A supplementary affidavit along with the statement of the prosecution witnesses filed by the learned counsel for the applicant is also taken on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant Mukhtar Khan with a prayer to admit him on bail in Case Crime No.54 of 2016, under Sections 363,366Kha,376,406 IPC, P.S. C.B. Ganj, District Bareilly during the pendency of trial.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
The prosecution case in nut-shell is that an FIR was lodged on 16.2.2016 at 7.20 P.M. by Shamsher Khan in respect of an incident took place on 14.2.2016 that his daughter was sleeping on roof along with other children. At about 4 O' Clock his younger daughter told that the victim is not in her house. Thereafter he had made hectic efforts, but the victim could trace out. Later on it was found that the applicant had enticed away her daughter (victim) alongwith ornaments, 14 clothes and Rs.50,000/- cash.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that during the course of investigation, the statement of the victim was recorded where she has supported the prosecution case and after submission of the charge sheet, the case was committed to the court of sessions. During the course of trial, the statement of the victim was recorded wherein she has denied the allegations made against the applicant as the statement u/S 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded under the pressure of police. In fact the victim has performed marriage with the applicant out of her own volition. Hence she has been turned hostile. The applicant who is absolutely innocent is languishing in jail since 7.4.2016, deserves to be released on bail as the prospect of conclusion of trial is too remote. The applicant undertakes to appear before the court concerned on each and every date during course of trial and will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has contended that the victim was enticed away by the applicant on the pretext that he will perform marriage with her. In her statement recorded u/S 164 Cr.P.C. the victim has categorically stated that there is active participation of the applicant in the commission of offence. The victim was enticed away by the applicant alongwith ornaments, 14 clothes and Rs.50,000/- cash. It is further contended that as the victim was minor at the time of incident, her consent is not treated as valid consent. In case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he will misuse the liberty of bail and protract the trial by extending threat to the complainant and his family member which is going in natural manner. It is further contended that the trial is proceeding and as such the court below may be directed to proceed with the case.
Having considered the advanced submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. on behalf of the State and looking to the gravity of the offence in the manner in which the incident had occurred, this court is not inclined to enlarge the applicant on bail. Accordingly, the bail application is rejected.
However, the court below is directed to proceed with the case in utmost expeditious manner since the speedy trial is the essence of justice and shall conclude the trial on its own merit without being influenced by any observation made by this Court within six months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.
Order be communicated to the court concerned forthwith.
Order Date :- 26.7.2018 M. Tariq