Court No. - 55
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28877 of 2018 Applicant :- Sonu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Lav Srivastava,Purushottam Dixit Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Counter affidavit filed by the learned A.G.A. today in the Court is taken on record.
Heard Sri Purushottam Dixit, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anirudh Sharma, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.
learned counsel for the applicant submitted that although the applicant is not named in the F.I.R. He further submitted that applicant has not committed any offence and he has been falsely implicated in the present case, due to some ulterior motive. It is also submitted that Jaikaran is the main accused, who is responsible for kidnapping of the victim and there seems to be no role of the applicant in the present case. The statement of the applicant recorded on 22.04.2018, which has been annexed as annexure-2 with this bail application. 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 29.04.2018. 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 satisfactoin 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.
The applicant Jaikaran, be released on bail in Case Crime No. 490 of 2017, under Sections 363, 366, I.P.C., & Section 7/8 POCSO Act, 2012 at Police Station Gabhana, District Aligarh, on furnishng a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to 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 expeditiously preferably 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 :- 19.9.2018 Md Faisal