Waseem vs State Of U.P.
2016 Latest Caselaw 2049 ALL

Citation : 2016 Latest Caselaw 2049 ALL
Judgement Date : 28 April, 2016

Allahabad High Court

Waseem vs State Of U.P. on 28 April, 2016

Bench: Vipin Sinha




HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 46
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13476 of 2016
 

 
Applicant :- Waseem
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Vashisth
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A. G. A. for the State.

Applicant has moved the present bail application seeking bail in Case Crime No. 1564 of 2015 under Sections 354, 354A, 452 I.P.C.and 7/8 POCSO Act, P.S. Sahibabad District Ghaziabad.

I have perused the prosecution story as set up in the F.I.R. and also the bail rejection order.

The contention as raised at the Bar by learned counsel for the applicant is that the accused-applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to village enmity. It is next contended that the applicant has no previous criminal history. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 17.11.15 and in the wake of heavy pendency of cases in the Court, there is no likelihood of any early conclusion of trial.

Learned AGA has opposed the bail application of the applicant.

After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.

The prayer for bail is granted. The application is allowed.

Let the applicant Waseem involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.

Order Date :- 28.4.2016

Anand