Court No. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50312 of 2021 Applicant :- Sudhir Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ajeet Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pavan Kumar Maurya
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of applicant in the Court today is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri P.K. Maurya, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in Case Crime No. 75 of 2021, under Sections 363, 120B, 504, 506, 376 I.P.C. and section 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Dokati, district-Ballia, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
The first information report was lodged by the mother of the alleged victim, who is aged about fifteen years against three named and one unknown person, alleging therein that on 25.8.2021 at about 2:00 P.M. the victim had gone to Lalganj Bazar and when she had not returned till evening, then a search was launched but she could not be traced out. It was also alleged that the co-accused Rinkoo Devi, who was the friend of daughter of the complainant and she used to go to her house. When the complainant inquired from co-accused Rinkoo Devi and her other family members about his daughter then they did not respond properly. It was also alleged that co-accused Rinkoo Devi and her other family members had enticed away the complainant's daughter.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was not named in the first information report. Later on the name of the present accused surfaced in this case and he was alleged to have enticed away the minor daughter of the complainant. After lodging of the FIR the investigation was proceeded and after completion of investigation the named accused persons were exonerated from the charges and the present accused has been chargesheeted by the police. Further submission is that the alleged victim in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. (Annexure-SA5) to the supplementary affidavit has categorically stated that she was in consensual relationship with the applicant and she wanted to marry him but her parents were not agreed that's why she had left her parental home on her own accord and gone with the applicant on 25.8.2021 and travelled with him at several places. He also submits that the alleged victim in her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. (Annexure- SA9) to the supplementary affidavit has reiterated the same facts which were stated by her in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. She also stated in her statement that she has solemnized marriage with the applicant on 30.8.2021 and she wanted to live with him. He lastly submits that the applicant, who is in jail since 13.10.2021 and has no criminal antecedents to his credit is entitled to be enlarged on bail during pendency of the trial.
The prayer for bail has been vehemently opposed by learned A.G.A. but has not disputed the fact that alleged victim has solemnized marriage with the applicant.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of the punishment, submissions of learned counsel for the parties, considering that the alleged victim has solemnized marriage with the present accused and she lived with him in his house, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of the trial.
Let the applicant, Sudhir Kumar be released on bail in the aforesaid case on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:-
(a) The applicant shall attend the court according to the conditions of the bond executed by him.
(b) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
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.
Order Date :- 22.12.2021 Faridul