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

Raju vs State Of U P

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

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 22
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 49131 of 2017 Applicant :- Raju Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Virendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
According to the prosecution case the F.I.R. was lodged against the applicant Raju alleging that he made unnatural offence voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with the daughter of the complainant Punnar who is aged about two and half year; the F.I.R. was lodged against the applicant after the delay of about three months i.e. on 05.01.2016 without any explanation.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case; there is no independent witness against the applicant; there is no injury found on the body of the injured except swelling; there is no possibility to get this case decided in near future; in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial; he is in jail since 19.02.2016 (more than two year) having no criminal history.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and admitted that he has received no criminal history against this accused.
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 opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant Raju involved in the Case Crime No. 7 of 2016, under Section 377 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, P.S. Ali Nagar, District Chandauli be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties 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 appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission, of which applicant is suspected.
v) The applicant shall not directly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade the applicant 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 :- 28.2.2018/A. Tripathi
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

Raju vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
28 February, 2018
Judges
  • Aniruddha Singh
Advocates
  • Virendra Singh