Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 132 of 2019 Appellant :- Subhas Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Ashok Kumar Singh,Pratibha Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ghandikota Sri Devi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
This criminal appeal under Section 14A (2) of The Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short 'Act, 1989') has been filed on behalf of the appellant, challenging the order dated 05.12.2018 passed Special Judge (POCSO Act)/ Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Jaunpur in Bail Application No. 232 of 2018, arising out of Case Crime No. 172 of 2018 under Sections 363, 376, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 3(2) (5) SC/ST Act and 3/4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offence Act, 2012, Police Station Khetasarai, District Jaunpur, seeking bail in the aforesaid sections.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the appellant that in order to harass the accused/appellant, the informant lodged false FIR against the accused/appellant and three other persons on 05.10.2018 at 23.40 hours for the alleged occurrence, which is said to have taken place on 04.10.2018 at 14.30 hours; that according to the prosecution version as alleged by the informant, his minor daughter, aged about 15 years, has gone to Gabhiran Chauraha alongwith one Antima, daughter of Subhas, co-accused Atis met her and taken the daughter of the informant in his Bolero Vehicle to Jaunpur, placed her in a hotel and forcibly committed rape on her; that thereafter, said Atis left the daughter of the informant at 2.30 p.m. in her village, when the informant asked his daughter, then she narrated the incident to her father; that the daughter of the informant was enticed away by the said Atis with the help of Subhash, Kariya and Gautam of the same village. It was further contended that only allegations levelled against the present accused/appellant that he has extended co-operation to co- accused Atis to entice away the victim; that statement of the victim under section 164 Cr. P.C. was recorded on 17.10.2018, in which she has not made any allegations of sexual harassment against the present accused/appellant; that the accused/appellant is no way concerned with the alleged occurrence and he has been falsely implicated by the respondent no.2 due to inimity only to harass the accused/appellant; that the accused/appellant has no criminal history; that accused/appellant is in jail since 11.11.2018.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail. It is further submitted that there is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order passed by the trial court, hence, the accused/appellant is not entitled for bail.
Upon hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusal of record, and on considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without adverting to the merits of the case, I am of the considered view that the bail rejection order dated 05.12.2018 passed by the learned Trial Court is liable to be set aside.
In the result, the appeal succeeds and the same stands allowed. The aforesaid impugned order is hereby set aside.
Let the appellant Subhas be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with following conditions:-
1. The appellant will continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.
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 court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 26.2.2019 T.S.