Court No. - 70
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6635 of 2019 Applicant :- Shesh Mani Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Prakash Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no. 400 of 2018, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. & 3/4 of the POCSO Act, P.S. Dhanghata, District-Sant Kabir Nagar, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
It is submitted that applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. F.I.R. dated 09.07.2018 was lodged by the mother of the victim regarding the alleged incident dated 22.06.2018 making allegations that the applicant on 22.06.2018 at about 12.00 noon enticed away her daughter Indu (prosecutrix). It is submitted that prosecutrix was recovered on 11.09.2018, thereafter her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded, in which she has disclosed that she herself eloped with the applicant. On 20.09.2018 after nine days of recovery of the prosecutrix, her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded, in which also she has disclosed that she herself left her house and eloped with the applicant, but she was not aware about the fact that applicant is a married person and has four children. The prosecutrix in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. also disclosed that the applicant get married with the prosecutrix in Delhi. It is further submitted that in the medical examination report age of the prosecutrix has come on record about 23 years and she was matured enough to understand the significance of morality for the act, she was consenting to. On the aforesaid facts, it is contended that considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case in totality, the only inference can be drawn that the prosecutrix was major on the date of alleged occurrence and was consenting party with the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 11.09.2018, therefore, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Per contra learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, 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 fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant Shesh Mani be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.
ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities.
(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.
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.
It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. It is further clarified that the trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.
Order Date :- 26.2.2019/AKT