SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sonu vs State Of U.P. on 18 November, 2019

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. – 87

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 14708 of 2019

Applicant :- Sonu

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Verma

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.

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

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to some ulterior motive. He further submitted that no offence under Section 377 IPC is made out against the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that there is no medical report of alleged victim on record to substantiate the allegations made in the FIR. It is also submitted that nobody have seen the alleged incident and there is no credible evidence against the applicant except one-statement of victim recorded under Sections 161 and Section164 Cr.P.C. He further submits that there are no chances of applicant’s fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the prosecution evidence, applicant has no previous criminal history and he is in jail since 11.7.2018.

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

Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment and submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.

Let the applicant-Sonu involved in Case Crime No. 168 of 2018, under Sections 377 IPC, Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 and Section 3(2)Section5 Scheduled Caste and SectionScheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Police Station-Keoladiya, District Bareilly, be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the 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.

In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.

Order Date :- 18.11.2019

Ankita

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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

Copyright © 2021 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