Court No. - 41
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 6097 of 2017 Appellant :- Suhel Respondent :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Appellant :- Pankaj Sharma,Prashant Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard Sri Prashant Sharma, learned counsel for the appellant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
Notice on complainant is served on 17.8.2018 but none is present on behalf of the complainant as per report of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hathras.
This criminal appeal under Section 14-A(2) Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, has been filed challenging the order dated 03.10.2017, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Hathras, arising out of Case Crime No. 485 of 2017, under Sections 354, 354-D, 504, 506 of I.P.C. & Section 3(2)5 S.C./S.T. Act and Section 8 of Prevention of Children From Sexual Offences Act, P.S.- Kotwali, District- Hathras, seeking bail in the aforesaid sections.
From perusal of the record, it transpires that vide order dated 06.11.2017, accused-appellant has been enlarged on interim bail.
According to the prosecution case, the First Information Report was lodged on 20.8.2017 against the accused- appellant alleging that he used to vulgar language with prosecutrix (aged about 15 years) with intent to outrage her modesty.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that appellant has been falsely implicated due to village party bandi. He further submitted that the appellant is a student of Intermediate. There is no specific allegation about sexual harassment. It was also submitted that there is no independent witness. Appellant has no criminal history and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and admitted that no criminal antecedent is reported against the appellant.
For the foregoing discussions, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the appellant has made out a case for bail.
The appeal is allowed. Impugned order dated 03.10.2017 rejecting bail of appellant is hereby set aside.
Let appellant Suhel involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
1. The appellant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
2. The appellant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3. The appellant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4. The appellant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
5. The appellant 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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Office is directed to send the lower court record to the concerned court immediately, if it has been received.
Order Date :- 27.8.2018 Puspendra