Sonu vs State Of U.P.
2014 Latest Caselaw 3462 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 48
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33374 of 2013
 

 
Applicant :- Sonu
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Dubey,Anand Prakash Dubey
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Abhitab Kumar Tiwari
 

 
Hon'ble Surendra Singh,J.

Counter affidavit has been filed today which is taken on record.

Applicant- Sonu seeks bail in Case Crime No. 250 of 2013, under Sections 363,366,376 IPC, Police Station Sardhana, District Meerut.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as Sri H.K. Rajesh holding brief of Sri Abhitab Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant and the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

Submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant that according to the medical opinion the victim was aged about 17 years and the Doctor, who had examined her, was unable to give any opinion about the alleged sexual intercourse. It was argued that the statement of the victim cannot be accepted on the face of it and it is very unnatural and is incompatible with the normal course of human conduct. The version given by the prosecutrix is unsupported by the medical evidence and the surrounding circumstances belie the case set up by her. Moreover, absence of injury or mark of violence on her body improbablise/demolishes the story of the prosecution. It is further pointed out that more or less similarly placed co-accused Amit has been granted bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court on 9.5.2014 vide Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.15531 of2014. Photostat copy of the order has been produced before this Court which is taken on record.Apart from this the applicant is in jail since 24.4.2013 and had no criminal history to his credit, also deserves to be released on bail.

The bail is, however, opposed by the learned counsel for the informant and the learned A.G.A.

The points pertaining to nature of accusation, severity of punishment, reasonable apprehension of tampering the witnesses, prima facie, satisfaction regarding proposed evidence and genuineness of the prosecution case were duly considered.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the abovementioned applicant involved in 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. He will cooperate in the trial bonafidely without seeking adjournments.

3. He 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. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

Order Date :- 22.7.2014

Mt/