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

Vijendra @ Kallu vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|28 February, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 66
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5923 of 2019 Applicant :- Vijendra @ Kallu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Dhiraj Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for applicant, the learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
Applicant- Vijendra @ Kallu seeks bail in Case Crime No.
328 of 2018, under Sections 377, 506 IPC and 3/4 of POCSO Act, P.S. Sarsawa, District- Saharanpur.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that as per the first informant report, the applicant is alleged to have committed unnatural offence with the victim, however medical report does not support the prosecution story. Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that on the date of aforesaid incident, Vineet (victim) had committed rape upon the niece of the applicant, in respect of which first information report has been lodged against Vineet and his family members vide case crime no. 398 of 2018, in which Vineet was the main accused and only in the backdrop of the said fact the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Lastly, it is submitted that applicant is in jail since 14.8.2018 and in case he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial by all means. The police report has already been submitted and the chances of trial being concluded in near future is very bleak due to heavy dockets.
Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the fact that applicant is in jail since 14.8.2018 and has no criminal history to his credit.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let applicant Vijendra @ Kallu 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 the following conditions :-
(i) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity.
(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
(iv) The applicant shall regularly appear on the dates fixed by the trial court unless his personal attendance is exempted by the trial court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, it will be open to the opposite parties to approach the Court for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 28.2.2019 KU
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

Vijendra @ Kallu vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
28 February, 2019
Judges
  • Rajiv Gupta
Advocates
  • Dhiraj Kumar Pandey