Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Ramesh Yadav vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|30 January, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 66
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 168 of 2019 Applicant :- Ramesh Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Praveen Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This bail application has been filed by the applicant Ramesh Yadav seeking bail in Case Crime No. 127 of 2018, under Sections 354 Ka, 354 Kha, 379, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 7/8 of POCSO Act, Police Station Bhawarkol, District Ghazipur.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is wholly innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive.
Learned counsel for the applicant has next drawn the attention of the Court towards the statement of the victim under Section 161 CrPC, in which, it is alleged that while she was returning back after giving food to her father, applicant along with one Neelam started chasing her, however, she somehow reached her house and narrated the incident to her mother. One day after the said incident, applicant along with Neelam had entered in her house at 12:00 in the night in a drunken state and Neelam held her by her hand and tried to outrage her modesty, however, the applicant had entered in the hamlet of her mother and on raising alarm, they ran away. Per contra, in her statement under Section 164 CrPC, she has alleged that on 31.08.2018, the applicant along with co-accused Neelam had entered in her house in a drunken state and they tried to drag her away and on raising alarm, her mother reached there and they tried to disrobe her and pushed her, due to which, her mother received injuries.
Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that from the perusal of the aforesaid statements, it is evident that there is sharp contradiction in the statements of the victim under Sections 161 CrPC and 164 CrPC, as such, prima facie a case for bail is made out.
Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that the applicant has no criminal history to his credit and he is in jail since 29.11.2018 and in case, he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial by all means. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no chance of applicant fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses.
Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the fact that the applicant has no criminal history to his credit and he is in jail since 29.11.2018.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant Ramesh Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties (one surety shall be family member of the applicant) of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions :-
(i) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity.
(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
(iv) The applicant shall regularly appear on the dates fixed by the trial court unless his personal attendance is exempted by the trial court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, it will be open to the opposite parties to approach the Court for cancellation of bail.
The Trial Court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, keeping in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Alakh Alok Srivastava Vs. Union of India and another, reported in AIR 2018 (SC) 2004, if there is no legal impediment.
Order Date :- 30.1.2019 Nadim
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

Ramesh Yadav vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
30 January, 2019
Judges
  • Rajiv Gupta
Advocates
  • Praveen Kumar Singh