Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No.138 of 2019 under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C., Police Station Khodare, District Gonda, with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
The submissions of learned counsel for the applicant are that the applicant is innocent person and has been falsely implicated in the case, he is having no previous criminal history and in jail since 31.08.2019. It is further submitted on behalf of applicant that the applicant and the prosecutrix were known to each other and they were also good friends, as a result, the prosecutrix went alongwith the applicant to visit Lucknow without informing to her family members and merely due to annoyance, the father of prosecutrix lodged the F.I.R. as Case Crime No. 138 of 2019 (supra) on 22.08.2019 at 13:20 hours in which the father of prosecutrix alleged that the applicant enticed away his 16 year old daughter (prosecutrix).
Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the applicant and the prosecutrix came back to their home after visiting Lucknow and thereafter the statement of the prosecutrix was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. (appended as annexure No.3), in which the prosecutrix has categorically mentioned that on 21.08.2019 she went out from her house by pretending that she was going to her School for taking her School Leaving Certificate and in the meantime, the applicant met her and thereafter they both went to Lucknow where they visited different places by hiding themselves and the prosecutrix also stated that the applicant did not do anything wrong with her and when the prosecutrix felt that she did wrong and her family members would be searching for her, then she came back to her home.
Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the statement of prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was also recorded in which identical statement was given by her and she also refused for her medical examination and he further submitted that in the radiological test, the age of prosecutrix is found to be around 18-19 years and he also submitted that no case of Sections 363, 366 I.P.C. is made out. Therefore, the applicant is entitled for bail. In case of being enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submitted that the prosecutrix was enticed away by the applicant and it is admitted by her parents that she was aged about 16 years but he conceded the fact that in her radiological test her age is found to be around 18-19 years.
Considering the rival submissions of learned counsel for parties, material available on record as well as totality of fact and circumstances, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let applicant Saeed Anwar be released on bail in the aforesaid Case Crime on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
(1) Applicant will not try to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence of the case or otherwise misuse the liberty of bail.
(2) Applicant will fully cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when witnesses are present in the Court.
(3) Applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge; and (c) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.
Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 30.9.2019 S. Shivhare