High Court
Case Details
Court No. - 80 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 45063 of 2021 Applicant :- Neetu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhir Singh Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.
Legal Reasoning
After considering the facts of the present case it prima facie appears that; (a) As per date of birth certificate, age of the victim was 17 years 7 months at the time of the incident; (b) In her statements recorded under Sections 161 & 164, Cr.P.C., the victim has not supported the prosecution version; (c) The victim has denied her internal medical examination. It is a settled law that while granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusation, the nature of the evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, his role and involvement in the offence, his involvement in other cases and reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with. Taking into account the totality of facts and keeping in mind, the ratio of the Apex Court's judgment in the case of State of Rajasthan v. Balchand @ Baliay (1977) 4 SCC 308, Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors., v. Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1978 SC 429, Ram Govind Upadhyay v. Sudarshan Singh & Ors., (2002) 3 SCC 598, Prasanta Kumar Sarkar v. Ashis Chatterjee & Anr., (2010) 14 SCC 496 and Mahipal v. Rajesh Kumar & Anr., (2020) 2 SCC 118, the larger interest of the public/State and other circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail. Hence, the present bail application is allowed. Let applicant, Neetu S/o Parashuram Ahirwar be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions: (i) 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. (ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses. (iii) 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 of Cr.P.C. (iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in the trial court. (v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. (vi) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. If in the opinion of the trial court that 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 in accordance with law. The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance with law after the release of the applicant, if there is no other legal impediment. It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order. The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked. The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing. Order Date :- 8.2.2022 T. Sinha Digitally signed by TRIPTI SINHA Date: 2022.02.09 11:31:00 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Arguments
Heard Shri Sudhir Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant Neetu S/o Parashuram Ahirwar under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 02 of 2021 for offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 of the Indian Penal Code and 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, registered at Police Station Kailiya, District Jalaun, during pendency of the trial, after rejecting the bail application of the applicant by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge POCSO Act, Jalaun at Orai vide order dated 5.7.2021. Brief facts of the case are that the First Information Report dated 11.1.2021 has been lodged under Sections 363, 366, IPC and Section 7/8 POCSO Act by the father of the victim stating that on 6.1.2021 the applicant enticed away his minor daughter aged about 16 years from his field. First informant received information from the villager Munna and Amar Singh that at about 1.00 p.m. they saw the applicant and his daughter on the way towards Konchki. After lodging of the first information report, victim was recovered on 12.1.2021. The Investigating Officer recorded the statement of the victim under Section 161, Cr.P.C. on 12.1.2021 and collected date of birth certificate of the victim. The Investigating Officer produced the victim for medical examination before the doctor on 13.1.2021 where the victim has denied her internal medical examination. Statement of the victim under Section 164, Cr.P.C. has been recorded on 15.1.2021. After completing the investigation charge sheet has been submitted on 26.1.2021. The applicant was arrested on 12.1.2021. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. In her statements recorded under Sections 161 & 164, Cr.P.C., the victim has not supported the prosecution version. It is further submitted that the age of the victim was about 17 years 7 months at the time of the incident. The victim has denied her internal medical examination. It is further submitted that the victim has admitted that she had gone from her home on her free and sweet will. He has next argued that the applicant has no previous criminal history and if the applicant is released on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is not convicted in cognizable offence by any court. Per contra, learned AGA has supported the order passed by the Sessions court and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submits that the allegations involved are very serious in nature and the delay in lodging the FIR cannot be said to be fatal to the case at this juncture while considering the application of bail. But he could not point out any material to the contrary. He further submits that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.