Heard learned counsel for the applicant, for the State and perused the material brought on record and perused the material on record.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated due to ulterior motive. It is next submitted that there is no credential evidence against the applicant which may show involvement of the applicant in the present case. There is no independent reliable eye witness of the alleged incident. It is next submitted that applicant did not entice away the victim. As a matter of fact, victim who is major both the applicant and victim being in relationship with each other victim had gone with applicant out of her own sweet will and lived with the applicant, which is apparent from her statement recorded under section 161 and 164 Cr.PC. It is next submitted that the victim went with the applicant to different places where she must have come across many people at different points of time, she was free to make alarm for her safety, but she kept mum. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. Further submission is that applicant who is in jail since 24.11.2020, has no other previous criminal history and there is also no possibility of his either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. Applicant also undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant, but could not dispute the above submissions.
Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.
Let applicant- Praveen @ Babu, be released on bail in Case Crime No. 408 of 2020, under Sections- 363, 366 IPC, Police Station- Haidergarh, District- Barabanki, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trail and remain present personally on each and every date fixed after release. (ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
This bail application is accordingly allowed.
Order Date :- 13.1.2021 ssm