Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7877 of 2018 Applicant :- Ram Veer Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Srivastava,J.
Shri Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava, Advocate appeared for the first informant and filed his Vakalatnama, which is taken on record.
Heard Sri Pankaj Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Rajeev Kumar Shrivastava, learned counsel for the first informant along with learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant has not committed the crime as alleged, he has been falsely implicated. Further submission is that, in fact, victim along with her brother had committed theft in the house of Manju Devi in respect of which Manju Devi lodged an FIR against both of them which was registered being Case Crime No.490 of 2017 on 29.11.2017 and in counter blast thereof victim lodged the present FIR with false allegations therein. Further submission is that prosecution does not find support from medical evidence as no mark of injury has been found on the person of victim in her medical examination. Further submission is that applicant is in jail since 20.12.2017 having no other criminal history to his credit and there is also no possibility of his either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the evidence. Applicant also undertakes the he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the first informant have vehemently opposed the prayer and submitted that victim, who is minor, has fully supported the prosecution and there is no reason of false implication.
Upon hearing the respective submissions of learned counsel of both sides, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any view on merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.
Let applicant- Ram Veer be released on bail in Case Crime No. 497 of 2017, under Sections 376, 442, 506, IPC & Section 3/4 POCSO Act, 2012, P.S.-Baldev, District Mathura, on his 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 :- 27.2.2018 T. Sinha