Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2018
  6. /
  7. January

Sonu vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|24 September, 2018
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35854 of 2018 Applicant :- Sonu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Sisodia,Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava,Virendra Singh Tomar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri Rajiv Sisodia, Sri Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava & Sri Virendra Singh Tomar, learned counsels for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.151 of 2018, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 376, 511 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Mandawar, District Bijnor, with the prayer to release him on bail.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant and the first informant are resident of the same village and are on inimical terms regarding an alleged incident of Mar-peet by the applicant after entering the house of the informant on 30.4.2018 at 12 noon, the first information report was lodged next day on 1.5.2018 at 12.18 P.M., under Sections 452, 325, 504 IPC. The same version was stated by the first informant in the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. However, after six days of the incident, they developed version that on 30.4.2018 the applicant had taken the minor daughter of the first informant and attempted to rape on her. Based on subsequent development, the first information report was converted under Sections 376, 511 IPC. It is argued that the applicant was also beaten up by the first informant and then the version of alleged attempted rape was developed. Lastly, it is submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 7.5.2018 having no criminal antecedents.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not point out anything material to the contrary.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made, without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let applicant Sonu, 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 :- 24.9.2018 Hasnain
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Sonu vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
24 September, 2018
Judges
  • Rajul Bhargava
Advocates
  • Rajiv Sisodia Dhirendra Kumar Srivastava Virendra Singh Tomar