Sri Atin Krishna, Advocate has filed power on behalf of opposite party no.2 victim and the same is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for opposite party no.2, the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-Sunny Kashyap who is involved in Case Crime No.61 of 2020, under Section 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and Section 5j(ii)/6 POCSO Act, Police Station-Saadatganj, District-Lucknow.
Submission of counsel for applicant is that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The F.I.R. is lodged by the mother of the victim Nida Rizwi, who is made party before this Court. Learned counsel for applicant states that both applicant and victim are major and married since 08.03.2020 and the marriage certificate is also annexed as Annexure-4 to the affidavit accompanying the bail application. The victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has stated that she is aged about 19 years and she has married the applicant and has also a son out of the said marriage. She has also stated that she wants to live with her husband-applicant. The criminal complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. is also lodged by the victim against her mother and father, copy of which is also filed as Annexure-8 to the bail application. It is further contended that even in the medical report, age of the victim is shown to be 18 years and, therefore, she is major. It is next argued that the applicant is neither a previous convict nor he has any previous criminal history prior to lodging of the present case. It is lastly contended that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 11.07.2020.
Learned A.G.A strongly opposes the prayer for grant of bail, however, also on instructions, he could not place any cogent evidence against the applicant. He has also not disputed the above contention made by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.
Let applicant-Sunny Kashyap 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 subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(1) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(2) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
(3) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution witnesses.
(4) The applicant will not indulge in any illegal activities during the period of bail.
(5) In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court would be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 12.1.2021 Arti/-
(Vivek Chaudhary,J.)