Court No. - 55
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19960 of 2018 Applicant :- Pramod Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Dheeraj Singh (Bohra),Bishram Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State, and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was filed against Pramod, Manoj, Vimla Devi, Sushila Devi, Sri Kishun and Rannu alleging that Pramod raped daughter (16 years) of complainant Smt. Gyanti Devi, made video and threatened; when complainant put pressure on family of Pramod to marry victim, on 22.3.2014 they kidnapped girl; on 23.3.2014 they burnt the dead body of girl. After investigation, on 25.4.2014 Final Report was submitted against all accused and on protest petition they were summoned vide order dated 14.12.2017 by Additional District Judge, Court No.2, Kushinagar after recording statements under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. treating the protest case as a complainant case.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that co- accused namely Manoj, Vimla Devi, Sushila Devi and Shrikishun have already been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 23.5.2018 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 16918 of 2018, since the role of the applicant is not distinguishable with the role of co-accused, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail. The applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was filed after long time and he was summoned by the Court in complaint case without giving opportunity of hearing as well as cross- examining the prosecution witnesses. He is languishing in jail since 22.3.2018 (more than two months) having no criminal history. In case applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant. He admitted that the applicant has no criminal history.
Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let applicant Pramod involved in Complaint Case No. 01/2017, under Sections 354-B, 363, 364, 366, 376, 342, 302, 201, 506 IPC and 3/4 POCSO, Police Station Kotwali Hata, District Kushinagar be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two 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 court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 28.5.2018 A. Singh