Court No. - 51
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31126 of 2021 Applicant :- Sajid Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.
Despite service of notice none is present for the informant.
Heard Sri Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has not committed the present offence. It is further argued that the applicant was not named in the FIR. Referring to the FIR it is further argued that FIR was lodged against one Sumit. Victim recovered on 16.09.2020. Statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. of the victim was recorded but nothing was stated by her regarding the involvement of the present applicant or any other person. She specifically stated that she went from her house at her own freewill. It is also argued that victim herself has denied from medical examination. If the date of birth of the victim disclosed in the prosecution evidence is taken into consideration she was aged about 17 years 7 months. Referring to the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. it was further argued that nothing specific was stated by her to attract the offence under Section 376 IPC. She implicated the applicant for the first time in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. recorded on the basis of advise/after though. Had the applicant been involved in committing the present offence, this fact would have come in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. itself. Thus, referring to the facts and circumstances of the case, it was further argued that no prima facie case is made out against the applicant. He is in jail since 09.01.2021 having no criminal history.
Learned A.G.A. argued that victim supported the prosecution case against the applicant in the statmenet under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. Thus, a prima facie case is made out.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the nature of the offence, complicity of the accused, scrutinizing the facts mentioned in the FIR, statement of witnesses recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., medical evidence and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant Sajid involved in Case Crime No. 274 of 2020, under Sections 363, 376, 377 I.P.C. and Section 4 POCSO Act, P.S. Khanpur, District Bulandshahr be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions :
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
5. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him 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 prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.
Order Date :- 28.10.2021 Sachdeva Digitally signed by OM PRAKASH Date: 2021.10.28 13:16:52 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad