Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1888 of 2018 Appellant :- Sunil Yadav Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Rajendra Kumar,Kuldeep Saxena,Sunil Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Manish Chandra Tiwari,Ram Singh Yadav
Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Tripathi,J.
Counter affidavit has been filed by private-respondents in the Court today, the same is taken on record.
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 14.03.2018 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Ghazipur, in Bail Application No. 33 of 2018 (Sunil Yadav v. State of U.P.), arising out of Case Crime No. 15 of 2018, under Sections 363, 366, 376, 506 and 342 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act, 2012 and Section 3(2)(VA) of Act, 1989, Police Station - Kasimabad, District - Ghazipur, seeking bail in the aforesaid sections.
As per prosecution version, while the prosecutrix aged about 15 years, had gone to answer nature's call in the field, co-accused Chandrashekhar and appellant Sunil Yadav abducted and committed rape on her.
Learned counsel for the appellant contended that as per medical report, age of the prosecutrix is more than 18 years. At the time of her medical examination, the prosecutrix did not made any allegation of rape against the applicant. Allegation of rape has been made against co-accused Sahil. He further contended that the appellant bears no criminal antecedents and is languishing in jail since 01.02.2018.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the private- respondents opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that there is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order passed by the trial court. They further contended that as per high school certificate, the prosecutrix is minor. The appellant and co- accused Sahil have committed rape on her.
The prosecutrix has not sustained any internal or external injury. Medical report does not support the fact of rape on the prosecutrix. In her statement under Section 164 of Cr.P.C., 1973, the prosecutrix has stated that while she had gone to answer nature's call, appellant Sunil and co-accused Sahil lifted her and took her at the residence of Sahil, which is at a distance of about one and half kilometre from her village.
Without commenting on the merits of the case, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the bail application filed before the court below deserves to allowed. It is ordered accordingly.
In the result, the appeal succeeds and the same stands allowed. Impugned order dated 14.03.2018 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Ghazipur is hereby set aside.
Let the appellant - Sunil Yadav be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
Order Date :- 22.1.2019 I. Batabyal