Court No. - 84
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4620 of 2019 Applicant :- Rahul Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Lavkush Kumar Bhatt Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed in Court today, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No. 462/2018, under Sections 366, 376, 120- B IPC & Sections 3/4 of POCSO Act, police station Dhaulana, District Hapur with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the accused-applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. Alleged victim Upashana is a major lady and she was having love affair with co-accused Amar alias Chinki and has solemnized marriage with him on 17.09.2018, the photocopy of marriage certificate has been annexed as annexure no. SA-1 of the supplementary affidavit. Co- accused Amar alias Chinki and victim Upashana have filed a Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 27398 of 2018 before this Court for quashing of the FIR of this case, in which their arrest was stayed till filing of the charge-sheet. It was further submitted that in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., victim Upashana has stated her age 18 ½ year and has denied any kidnapping and that in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has not supported the prosecution version. It has been pointed out that in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., victim Shivani has stated that after alleged kidnapping, she was taken to Delhi and applicant Rahul and his wife have came back from there and after that she and co-accused Aakash alias Chotu have gone to Chandigarh and there they performed marriage and they lived as husband and wife. It was submitted that the version of victim Shivani in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is false and afterthought. It was further argued that co-accused Aakash alias Chotu and Amar alias Chinki have already been enlarged on bail by different Benches of this Court, copies of which have been produced and the same are taken on record. It was also argued that the applicant is in judicial custody since 29.08.2018, having no criminal history and in case, applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and argued that applicant is named in the FIR and there are allegations against him that he committed rape upon victim Upashana as well as upon another victim Shivani and that as per medical examination report of victim Upashana, her age is 17 years and that age of victim Shivani was about 13 years. However, it has not been disputed that allegations against applicant are similar to that of co-accused Amar alias Chinki, who has already been enlarged on bail.
Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant Rahul involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during trial.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.
3. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The applicant will not try to contact, threat or otherwise influence the complainant, victim or his/ her family members or any of the witness of the case.
Order Date :- 29.11.2019 Anand