Raj Bahadur vs State Of U.P.
2015 Latest Caselaw 5123 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 11
 

 
Case :- BAIL No. - 11048 of 2015
 

 
Applicant :- Raj Bahadur
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhaker Prakash
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

Sri Ajay Kumar Mishra, Advocate has filed vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant be taken on record.

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

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in medical report the age of the victim has been shown about 17 years. In fact at the time of the alleged incident the victim was major. The statement of the victim recorded under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C shows that the victim was a consenting party. The victim in her statement recorded under section 161 Cr.P.C  has shown her age about 20 years herself. The victim and the applicant has solemnized their marriage in Arya Samaj temple at Lucknow on 25.7.2015. The victim in her statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C has stated that she had gone with the applicant  on her own sweet will. It has further been submitted that the victim wants to go with her husband (applicant). It has further been submitted that the applicant has not committed the alleged offence. False allegation has been made against the applicant.  There is no criminal history of the applicant and is in jail since 19.8.2015.

Per contra, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A have opposed the prayer for bail and argued that as per High School certificate the date of birth of the victim is Ist July, 1998 which shows that at the time of the alleged incident the victim was minor. It has further been submitted that the applicant has committed the alleged offence. therefore, the applicant is not entitled for bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.

Let the applicant Raj Bahadur involved in Case Crime No. 210 of 2015, under Sections  363, 366, 376, 120B  IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act,  P.S. Rampur Mathura, District Sitapur 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:-

1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidences.

2. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and co-operate with the trial.

3. The applicant will appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned.

In case of breach of any conditions mentioned above, the trial court shall at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.

Order Date :- 7.12.2015

A.