Allahabad High Court
Vikas vs State Of U.P. on 9 October, 2014
Bench: Het Singh Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 16
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31655 of 2014
Applicant :- Vikas
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Niwas Singh,Vinay Kr. Singh Chandel
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Het Singh Yadav,J.
Heard Sri Vinay Kumar Singh Chandel, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Sri Chandel submits that the daughter of first informant is major. She was in love with the applicant. She walked out of her parental house and joined the company of the applicant out of her own volition. As per the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C., it is clearly stated by her that she was in love with the applicant and eloped with him out of own free will. It is categorically stated by her that she had physical relation with the applicant with her free consent and will. As per medical opinion, the age of the prosecutirx is 17-years. It is settled law that the age determined by the Doctor on the basis of ossification test, it can be varied 2-years on the either side and except the medical opinion there is no other age proof of the prosecutrix on record. Thus, the prosecutirix was the consenting party and the applicant, accordingly, committed no offence. The applicant is in jail since 11.6.2014 and, therefore, deserves to be admitted on bail.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the bail prayer. However, it is not disputed by him that the prosecutrix in her statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. has not supported prosecution version at any score.
The age of the prosecutrix as per medical opinion is 17-years. There can be veriation of 2-years on the either side in the opinion regarding age based on ossification test. The margin benefit of two years will go in favour of the accused. Thus, the prosecutirx appears to be major.
The prosecutirx in her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. has not supported the prosecution version rather it has been clearly stated by her that she was consenting party. The applicant accordingly deserves to be enlarged on bail.
It is made clear that the view expressed herein above are prima facie in nature for disposal of this bail application only and would have no impact on the trial in any way.
Let the applicant Vikas involved in case Crime No. 697 of 2014, under section 363, 366, 376 IPC and 3/4 the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (Pocso Act), police station Sahibabad, district Ghaziabad be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond of Rs. 1,00000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions that:
(i). 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 him to disclose such facts to the court or to any other authority.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the Court on the dates fixed for hearing in the case and will co-operate in the trial. In case of unavoidable circumstances for remaining absent, he shall immediately give intimation to the court concerned through counsel and request be made to the trial court that he may be permitted to be present through counsel.
(iii) He will not misuse the liberty of the bail and will not repeat any such instance in future.
Deviation of any of the above conditions shall entail cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 9.10.2014
SKS
