SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Gautam vs State Of U.P. on 25 November, 2019


?Court No. – 84


Applicant :- Gautam

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Abhay Raj Yadav

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

Supplementary rejoinder affidavit filed in Court today, is taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No. 186/2018, under Section 377 IPC Sections 5/6 of POCSO Act, police station Thathia, District Kannauj with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail.

It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the accused-applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. The alleged incident has been shown of 05.07.2018, whereas FIR has been lodged on 07.07.2018. It was submitted that even as per the statement of victim boy recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., role attributed to the applicant is that of making video clip and there are no allegations that he has committed any unnatural act with the victim boy. It was further submitted that during trial, complainant as well as victim boy have not made any allegations, whatsoever, against the applicant as they turned hostile. Learned counsel further submitted that the applicant is in judicial custody since 20.10.2018, having no criminal history and in case, applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail.

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail.

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence and all attending facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby allowed.

Let the applicant Gautam involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the following conditions:

1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

2. The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

3. The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial Court.

4. The applicant shall not indulge in such acts like that of present case.

5. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case.

Order Date :- 25.11.2019




Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2022 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation