Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Sumit Pratap vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|26 November, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 51906 of 2019 Applicant :- Sumit Pratap Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Upendra Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
1. Heard Sri Upendra Upadhyay, learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Rajendra Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant upon appearance filed today as well as Sri C.P. Singh, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
2. The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant - Sumit Pratap with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 97 of 2019, under Sections 363, 366, 354-Ka I.P.C. and Section 8 POCSO Act, Police Station - Awagarh, District - Etah, during pendency of trial.
3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, at present:
(i) the applicant is accused of abduction with intent to force marriage and sexual harassment etc., punishable with imprisonment of 10 years;
(ii) against FIR lodged on 17.05.2019, the applicant is in confinement since 11.07.2019;
(iii) the applicant claims to have cooperated in the investigation. In any case he is not shown to have unduly evaded arrest;
(iv) the applicant has no criminal history;
(v) chargesheet has already been submitted yet trial has not commenced. Therefore, there is no hope of early conclusion of the trial;
(vi) on prima facie basis only, it may be noted, according to the applicant, there is reasonable doubt in the prosecution story, inasmuch as the two girls had left a note before their disappearance blaming their parents for such conduct. Then, in the statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., barring one allegation against the applicant, they have largely stated that they left their home of their own freewill;
(vii) in any case, no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State and or the informant that the applicant, if enlarged on bail would either tamper with the evidence or delay the trial.
4. In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on the final 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:-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressuring the witness, during the investigation or trial.
(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
5. In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, the bail being granted shall be cancelled.
6. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 26.11.2019 AHA
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

Sumit Pratap vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
26 November, 2019
Judges
  • Saumitra Dayal Singh
Advocates
  • Upendra Upadhyay