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

Neeraj vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|21 December, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 47192 of 2018 Applicant :- Neeraj Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Lavkush Kumar Bhatt Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Neeraj in connection with Case Crime No. 313 of 2018 under Section 363, 366, 376 IPC and Section 3/4 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, P.S. Kalan, District Shahjahanpur.
Heard Sri Lavkush Kumar Bhatt, learned counsel for the applciant and Sri J.B. Singh, learned AGA along with Sri Abhinav Tripathi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the age of the prosecutrix, according to the report of the Emergency Medical Officer dated 22.09.2018 based on an ossification test done at the Government Women Hospital, Shahjahanpur, is 18 years. It is submitted that going by the aforsaid medical estimation of the age, prosecutrix is clearly a major, and, therefore, provisions of POCSO Act would not be attracted. Learned counsel for the applicant has invited the attention of the Court to the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C. which in categorical terms is exculpatory, and, says that the prosecutrix accompanied the applicant to Delhi of her free will and has married him. It is said that she wants to go and stay with the applicant.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, in particular, the fact that the prosecutrix is a major, and, the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is exculpatory, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.
Let the applicant Neeraj involved in Case Crime No. 313 of 2018 under Section 363, 366, 376 IPC and Section 3/4 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, P.S. Kalan, District Shahjahanpur be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.
v) 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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the complainant would be free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.
Order Date :- 21.12.2018 Deepak
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

Neeraj vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
21 December, 2018
Judges
  • J J Munir
Advocates
  • Lavkush Kumar Bhatt