HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. – 84
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 6222 of 2020
Applicant :- Sunil Yadav
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Bibhuti Narayan Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon’ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.
This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Sunil Yadav in connection with Case Crime No.463 of 2019, under Section 376 I.P.C., 3/4 of the POCSO Act and under Section 3(2)(V) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Nichlaul, District Maharajganj.
The first information report of this incident was lodged by the complainant against Sunil Yadav alleging that on 14.10.2019 at about 6.00 p.m. her daughter Puja with whom the applicant Sunil Yadav was trying to talk forcibly and caught hold her daughter and is harassing the daughter of the complainant. The first information report of this incident was lodged under Section 354 I.P.C. and 7/8 POCSO Act. The complainant as well as the victim in their statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. deposed that the victim was caught hold by the applicant and she was harassed and no allegation of rape was narrated by the complainant or the victim. The allegation of rape was found mentioned in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., after about seventeen days of the incident.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with the ulterior motive. He submitted that to enhance the gravity of the offence allegation of rape has been levelled after much thought and legal consultation. He further submitted that the age of the victim is about 19 years as per medical, copy whereof has been annexed on page no.53 of the paper book. He further submitted that the victim has not dared to come forward to get herself medically examined. The allegation of rape does not find corroboration from any medical evidence. He submitted that there is no previous criminal history of the applicant. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 07.12.2019 and in case, he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail plea.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.
Let the applicant Sunil Yadav involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses;
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;
iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission;
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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
Order Date :- 10.2.2020