Court No. - 55
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36235 of 2018 Applicant :- Sonu @ Hardesh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Hemant Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Sri Hemant Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ghanshyam Kumar, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Learned counsel for the applicant has next drawn the attention of this Court towards the statement of the alleged victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., wherein the victim has stated that the applicant had caught hold the hand of the victim and touched her waist. It is thus, submitted that no offence under the charged section is made out against the applicant. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to co-operate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the Court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 21.08.2018. It has been pointed out that the applicant has no criminal history.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC, 22, and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it be a case of bail.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case let the applicant Sonu @ Hardesh, involved in Case Crime No. 288 of 2018, under Sections 354Ka, 504, 506 I.P.C., & Section 8 POCSO Act, at Police Station Narsaina, District Bulandshahar be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each (one should be a family member) in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions.
1. The applicant will continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after released.
2. He will not tamper with the witnesses
3. He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.
It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Keeping in view of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Alakh Alok Srivastava Vs. Union of India and others reported in AIR 2018 SC 2004, trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same expeditioulsly preferable within a period of six month from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment.
Order Date :- 25.9.2018 Md Faisal