HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. – 72
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 45917 of 2019
Applicant :- Nasir
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- A.K. Mishra,Sati Shanker Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon’ble Siddharth,J.
As per office report dated 18.12.2019 notice on opposite party no.2 has been served.No one appears on behalf of the opposite party no.2.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Nasir with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 276 of 2019, under Sections 376, Section511, Section506 IPC, section 7/8 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offence Act, 2012 and section 67A Information Technology Act Police Station Nahtaur, District- Bijnor, during pendency of trial.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with some ulterior motive. It is submitted that there is no allegation of rape leveled against the applicant by the victim in her statement under Sectionsection 164 Cr.P.C.The allegation is that applicant was present at the time of alleged offence committed by the co-accused Akshay, with country made pistol.The First Information Report was initially lodged under Sectionsection 354, Section506 I.P.C. section 7/8 of POCSO Act and Sectionsection 67-A I.T. Act.It has been submitted that no case under Sectionsection 354 I.P.C. and section 7/8 POCSO Act is not made out.The implication of the applicant under Sectionsection 67-A of I.T. Act is not in accordance with law. The Apex Court in the case of Shreya Singhal Vs. Union of India, 2015 SCC (Vol.5) Page, 1 has held the aforesaid section unconstitutional. The applicant is languishing in jail since 23.8.2019, who is not a previous convict. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, larger mandate of the SectionArticle 21 of the Constitution of India and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
3. 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.
Order Date :- 18.12.2019
Atul kr. sri.
