High Court
Case Details
Court No. - 83 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6155 of 2023
Legal Reasoning
Applicant :- Vikas Rajbhar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Janardan Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dipendra Kumar Tripathi,Rakesh Kumar Srivastava,Saumya Srivastava Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J. 1. List has been revised. 2. Heard Shri Janardan Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Rakesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the informant as well as Shri R.M. Yadav, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.103 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376, 506, 120B I.P.C. and Section 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Gaurabadshahpur, District Jaunpur, during the pendency of trial. 4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have enticed away the minor sister of the informant, aged about 15 years, on 05.07.2022 at about 7:30 PM with the help of other co-accused persons. 5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He has nothing to do with the said offence. The victim is a consenting party as is evident from her statement recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. whereby she has stated that the applicant had forcibly taken her on a motorcycle to several places including Kerakat, Jaunpur, Siddharthnagar, Punjab and Allahabad High Court. Learned counsel has further stated that the victim had herself come with the applicant in the Court and had filed a writ petition whereby it was ordered by this Court vide order dated 12.10.2022 to get the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Learned counsel has further stated that there upon in compliance of the said order, the victim and the applicant had gone to the District Authorities to get it recorded and the victim has been taken away by her parents. Learned counsel has further stated that as per ossification test report, the age of the victim is 17 years. As such, the applicant may be granted a leverage of two years on the upper side. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 05.12.2022. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. 6. Per contra, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the applicant has abducted the victim and has taken her to several places and had threatened her that her brother shall be killed by him and under the said duress, she did not raise any alarm and after sneaking and meeting the landlord, where she was being kept, she took his mobile phone and called her parents, as such she was taken by them. They have further stated that as per school record, her date of birth is 08.04.2007. 7. In rebuttal, learned counsel for the applicant has placed much reliance on the settled case law of the Apex Court in Sushil Kumar vs. Rakesh Kumar, (2003) 8 SCC 673, wherein it has been stated that it is more often in the Indian Society that person shows the age of their wards much below than their actual age. 8. POCSO was formulated to protect children under the age of 18 years from sexual exploitation. Nowadays, more often than not it has become a tool for their exploitation. The Act was never meant to criminalise consensual romantic relationships between adolescents. However, this has to be seen from the facts and circumstances of each case. ''The factum of consensual relationship borne out of love should be of consideration while granting bail because it would amount to perversity of justice if the statement of victim was ignored and accused was left to suffer behind jail". 9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, taking into consideration the fact that the victim had been with the applicant for a period of three months and did not raise any alarm during all the way to Punjab and several districts of Uttar Pradesh, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed. 10. Let the applicant- Vikas Rajbhar involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. (i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial. (ii). The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness. (iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted. (iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected of the commission of which he is suspected. (v) The applicant 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. 11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted. 12. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses. Order Date :- 3.3.2023 Ravi Kant Digitally signed by :- RAVI KANT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad