Court No. - 87
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19474 of 2019 Applicant :- Rahul Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Bharti Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Virendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
This bail application has been filed by Rahul, for bail in Case Crime No. 27/2019 under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, P.S. Charthawal, District Muzaffar Nagar.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State and perused the record. No one is present for informant despite of notice.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. As per FIR two real sisters (victims) aged about 14 and 18 years, sisters of informant were enticed away on 11.01.2019, by the applicant and one, Krishna alongwith five other persons. FIR was lodged after six days of occurrence i.e., 17.01.2019. Learned counsel further submits that during the course of investigation both the victims were recovered and they implicated only applicant and one Krishna. Learned counsel further submits that as per their statement they were consenting parties and they had gone with their own will with the applicant to Haridawar and other places. Learned counsel further submits that five other persons named in the FIR have been exonerated during the course of investigation. Learned counsel further submits that the co- accused Krishna have already been granted bail by the co- ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 30.04.2019 in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 14935 of 2019 (Krishna Vs. State of U.P.). Learned counsel further submits that as per radiological report the age of the victim is about 17-18 years. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant is a law abiding person and having no criminal history and he is in jail since 30.01.2019. If he be released on bail, he will never misuse his liberty and will co-operate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
From perusal of the record it transpires that the FIR was lodged after six days of incident and victims have never raised any alarm.
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- Rahul, 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 :- 17.12.2019 S.K.