Court No. - 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 52564 of 2019 Applicant :- Subodh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Gyanendra Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Subodh with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 223 of 2019, under Sections 363, 366, 376, 504 IPC, and section 3/4 of Prevention of children From Sexual Offences Act Police Station Shamshabad, District- Farrukhabad , during pendency of trial.
Submission is that from the statement of victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. it appears that she is consenting party and went with the appellant on her free will without raising alarm and making any complaint.As per medical report victim is aged about sixteen years.Given margin of two years on higher side , she can be considered to be major.From the statement of the victim under section 164 Cr.P.C. it appears that she willingly eloped with the applicant thereafter implicated him. The statement of the victim does not corroborates the prosecution case. The age of the victim is eighteen years as per medical report. The Apex Court in the case of Rajak Mohd. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh in Criminal Appeal No.1395 of 2015 vide order dated 23.08.2018 has held that where the prosecutrix lived with the accused and freely moved around with the accused where she came across many people at different points of time but never complained of any criminal act, the conviction of the accused under Section 363, 366, 376 I.P.C was held to be unwarranted in law. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. He has no criminal history to his credit and he is languishing in jail since 13.9.2019. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018)3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
3. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 29.11.2019 Atul kr. sri.