Court No. - 61
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48592 of 2018 Applicant :- Sarfraz Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Hitesh Pachori Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Applicant- Sarfraz seeks bail in Case Crime No. 338 of 2018, under Sections- 363 I.P.C, P.S. Ecotech-3, District- Gautam Budh Nagar.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the incident is alleged to have taken place on 22.6.2018 whereas first information report has been lodged on 14.8.2018 after considerable period for which no explanation is coming forth. Learned counsel for the applicant has next drawn the attention of the Court to the statement of the victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C, in which she has stated that on 22.6.2018, she alongwith the applicant, who is the real uncle (Mausa) of the victim had gone to Ganganagar, Rajasthan and thereafter to Shikohabad where her aunt (Mausi) used to live. She has next stated that her uncle (Mausa) and aunt (Mausi) wanted to keep her in their house as they were not having any child, however, her mother wanted to bring her back and as such her mother lodged first information report, however, she do not want to initiate any further proceeding against them and wants to return back to her mother. However, in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. the victim has stated that on 22.6.2018 her uncle (Mausa- Sarfaraj) alongwith his brother Irfan had come at her house and threatened her for life and asked her to accompany them and as such she went alongwith them, who had taken her to Shikohabad and they also threatened her not to make any telephonic call to her mother and when she tried to talk to her mother, she was assaulted and after about one month, her mother came alongwith the police and had taken her. Thus, there is sharp contradiction in the statements of the victim under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. as such prima facie case for bail is made out. Lastly, it is submitted that applicant is in jail since 28.8.2018 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. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the fact that applicant is in jail since 28.8.2018 and he has no criminal history to his credit.
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 applicant- Sarfraz be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties 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 with a period of six months form 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, report in AIR 2018 (SC) 2004, if there is no other legal impediment.
Order Date :- 18.12.2018 KU