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

Rahul @ Sachin vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|28 March, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11258 of 2018 Applicant :- Rahul @ Sachin Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Narendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Srivastava,J.
Heard Shri Narendra Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant has been falsely implicated due to ulterior motive. Further submission is that F.I.R. of the incident has been lodged by the father of the victim with delay of 15 days without any plausible explanation. Further submission is that applicant did not entice away the victim. As a matter of fact both applicant and victim are major and victim being in love with applicant, had gone with applicant out of her own sweet will and solemnized marriage as is evident from her statement under section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. Further submission is that applicant who is in jail since 29.03.2017 has no other 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 prayer and submitted that recorded date of birth of victim being 03.07.2000, she is minor, therefore, her consent, if any, is no consent in law.
Having heard the submission of learned counsel of both sides, considering the facts and circumstances of the case specially the age as well as statement of victim in which she has not supported the prosecution and without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.
Let applicant Rahul @ Sachin be released on bail in Case Crime No. 204 of 2017, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and section 3/4 POCSO Act, 2012, P.S. Barnahal, District Mainpuri, 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 trial and remain present personally on each and every date fixed for framing of charge, recording of evidence as well as recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. or through counsel on other dates and in case of absence without sufficient cause, it will be deemed that he is abusing the liberty of bail enabling the court concerned to take necessary action in accordance with the provisions of Section 82 Cr.P.C. or Sections 174A and 229A I.P.C.
(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.
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.
Order Date :- 28.3.2018 /Bhanu
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

Rahul @ Sachin vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
28 March, 2018
Judges
  • Umesh Chandra Srivastava
Advocates
  • Narendra Kumar