Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30863 of 2018 Applicant :- Shiv Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- R.P.S. Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashutosh Kumar Mishra
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri R.P.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ashutosh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the first informant and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-Shiv Kumar in Case Crime No.188 of 2018, under Sections 354, 376, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 5(P)6, 9(0)10 of The Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Lodha, District-Aligarh with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. In fact, first informant and others had assaulted and attempted to murder the applicant by hanging on 9.4.2018 at 1.30 p.m. whose F.I.R. was lodged by the applicant's father on 10.4.2018 at 3.45 p.m. The medical report of the applicant has been annexed as Annexure-1 to the affidavit filed in support of the bail application. Thereafter the first informant lodged an F.I.R. on 10.4.2018 at 10.55 p.m. with the allegation that the applicant is a teacher in a school in which the prosecutrix was studying in Class-8th. It is stated that for the past two months the applicant used to pass lewd remarks on the victim and also teased her. It is further alleged that the applicant also used to extend threats of failing her in examination. The said F.I.R. lodged under Sections 354, 504, 506 I.P.C and 7/8 of The Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act. It is argued that in the first information report there is no allegation of sexual assault. However, the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has made material improvements and stated that the applicant is her next door neighbour and about a month back in the evening the applicant had called her on his terrace and had raped her. The alleged version of prosecutrix of rape is conspicuously missing in the F.I.R. which was lodged by the father of the prosecutrix. There is no early prospect of conclusion of trial. So, the applicant deserves to be released on bail.
Per contra, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submitted that the victim is less than 16 years of age. She has levelled serious allegation against the applicant. Terefore, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail. However, they could not dispute registration of F.I.R. by the father of the applicant in which the first informant and others are accused.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let applicant-Shiv Kumar be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions that:-
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;
2. The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses;
3. The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the courts below shall be at liberty to cancel bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 24.8.2018 MN/-