Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35809 of 2018 Applicant :- Raju @ Chandan Ram Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- A.T. Pandey,Rajkapoor Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri A.T. Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ramesh Kumar Chaurasia, learned counsel for the informant and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Raju @ Chandan Ram in Case Crime No. 61 of 2018, under Sections 363, 366, 376, 323, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 Prevention of Children from Sexual Offence Act, Police Station- Bansdih, District- Ballia with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is submitted that in fact the victim is a major girl and as per the medical report she is aged about 18 years. It appears that as per the school record her age is less than her actual age which is usually done by the parents. He further submits that the victim had travelled with the applicant to different places and stayed with him for about 17-18 days. When she came back her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded in which she has stated that she had gone with the applicant to Ballia Railway Station and then came to Delhi by train and stayed in a private room taken by the applicant on rent. She has further stated that both of them lived there as husband and wife and they want to marry. Similar such statement was also given by her before the doctor. However, it appears that in the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. recorded after 12 days of her coming back she under the pressure of her parents has developed the different story. There is no early prospect of conclusion of trial. So, the applicant, who is in jail since 25.05.2018, having no criminal history to his credit, deserves to be released on bail.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submitted that the victim as per the school record is less than 16 years of age. However, they could not dispute the material inconsistency and incongruity between the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let applicant- Raju @ Chandan Ram be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions that:-
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;
2. The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;
3. The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the courts below shall be at liberty to cancel bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 25.9.2018 Vikas