Court No. - 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 49194 of 2021 Applicant :- Pankaj Verma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Prakash Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Om Narayan Pandey
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Jai Prakash Singh, learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for State and Mr. Om Narayan Pandey, learned counsel representing first informant.
Perused the record.
This application for bail has been filed by applicant- Pankaj Verma seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No.0130 of 2021, under sections 363, 366, 376, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station- Kotwali, District- Shahjahanpur, during pendency of trial.
Record shows that in respect of an incident which is alleged to have occurred on 15.03.2021, a delayed F.I.R. dated 16.03.2021 was lodged by first informant- Ramesh Chandra Shukla (father of prosecutrix) and was registered as Case Crime No.0130 of 2021, under sections 354, 363, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station- Kotwali, District- Shahjahanpur. In the aforesaid F.I.R., two persons, namely, Pankaj Verma (applicant herein) and his father Ram Das Verma have been nominated as named accused.
According to prosecution story as unfolded in the F.I.R., it is alleged that applicant dislodged the modesty of prosecutrix by taking obscene photographs of her. The F.I.R. further states that threat was given by named accused Pankaj Verma to first informant. Ultimately, it is alleged that on 15.03.2021 applicant, enticed away the minor daughter of first informant.
Subsequent to the incident dated 15.03.2021, the prosecutrix was recovered on 15.03.2021. After lodging of the F.I.R., statement of complainant was recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. by Investigating Officer on 17.03.2021. Same is on record as Annexure-2 to the affidavit. This was followed by the statement of prosecutrix recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C. on 18.03.2021, which is on record as Annexure-3 to the affidavit. On the same day, prosecutrix was medically examined and her Medico Legal Report is on record as Annexure-4 to the affidavit. Ultimately, statement of prosecutrix was recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. on 24.03.2021, which is on record as Annexure-5 to the affidavit.
Upon completion of statutory investigation of aforementioned case crime number in terms of Chapter XII Cr.P.C., Investigating Officer submitted a charge-sheet dated 30.10.2021, whereby named accused Pankaj Verma (applicant herein) has been charge-sheeted under sections 363, 366, 376, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, whereas Ram Das Verma, father of applicant has been charge-sheeted under sections 504 and 506 I.P.C.
Learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated in above-mentioned case crime number. Allegations made in F.I.R. are false and concocted. No conviction of application is possible as per the allegations made in the F.I.R.. Applicant is a man of clean antecedents and he has no criminal history to his credit. Applicant is under custody since 25.06.2021. In case, applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall co-operate with the trial.
It is then submitted that the prosecutrix in her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. has not supported the prosecution story as unfolded in the F.I.R. On the aforesaid premise, it is thus urged that prosecutrix is a consenting party. As such, no offence as alleged in the F.I.R. is made out against applicant. The date of birth of prosecutrix is 06.07.2004. As such, prosecutrix was approximately 17 years on the date of occurrence. On the aforesaid premise, learned counsel for applicant contends that applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. and Mr. Om Narayan Pandey, learned counsel for first informant have opposed this bail application. They jointly contend that applicant is minor. The evidence on record clearly corroborates the prosecution story as unfolded in the F.I.R. Applicant is guilty of having enticed away a minor girl. As such, applicant does not deserve any sympathy of this Court.
Having heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for State, learned counsel for first informant, upon perusal of record, complicity of applicant and accusations made, this Court finds that applicant has made out a case for bail. Accordingly, bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Pankaj Verma involved in Case Crime No.0130 of 2021, under sections 363, 366, 376, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station- Kotwali, District- Shahjahanpur be released on bail on his furnishing 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 will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The applicant will 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 him 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 conditions,the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.
The party shall file self-attested computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court, Allahabad. The concerned Court / Authority / Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 20.12.2021 Saif