Court No. - 87
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8142 of 2019 Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Kalamuddin,M. A. Siddiqui Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pramod Kumar Srivastava
Hon'ble Virendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
Rejoinder affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the applicant is taken on record.
This bail application has been filed by Pankaj Kumar, for bail in Case Crime No. 297/2018, under Sections 354, 376, 506 of IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Utraon, District Allahabad.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and as per FIR the victim had gone from her house for toilet on 30.08.2018 at about 7:00 P.M., and the applicant had committed forceful intercourse (rape) with the victim but FIR was lodged on 07.09.2018 after eight days of incident. Learned counsel further submits that as per the statement made by the victim during medical examination both the victim and applicant were consenting parties. Learned counsel further submits that due to some dispute arose between the family members of the both the parties the alleged false FIR was lodged against the applicant. The applicant has no criminal history and he is in jail since 11.01.2019. If he be released on bail, he will never misuse his liberty and will co-operate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the victim has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the factual submission made by the learned counsel for the applicant. Both the counsel further submits that the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., has corroborated the prosecution story and the offence is grevious in nature and the applicant is not entitle for bail.
Looking into the facts and circumstances of the case as well as nature and gravity of the offence, material available on record regarding role of accused and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the bail application is liable to be allowed. Hence this bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant- Pankaj Kumar, involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties (one should be of his family members/nearest relative) 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 file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.
(v) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge, (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and (iv) argument/judgement. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 16.12.2019 S.K.