Rasool vs State Of U.P.
2016 Latest Caselaw 89 ALL

Citation : 2016 Latest Caselaw 89 ALL
Judgement Date : 8 March, 2016

Allahabad High Court

Rasool vs State Of U.P. on 8 March, 2016

Bench: Bachchoo Lal




HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 11
 

 
Case :- BAIL No. - 1999 of 2015
 

 
Applicant :- Rasool
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Lalu Prasad Bhatt,Devki Nandan Srivastava
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt.Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.

Heard learned Counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the F.I.R. of the alleged incident has been lodged with the delay of 23 days. There is no satisfactory explanation of delay in lodging the F.I.R. The statement of victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. shows that the victim went to Ayodhya with the applicant and other co-accused Raju where she remained 23 days with the applicant and other co-accused. The co-accused Raju having identical role has already been granted bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 02.02.2016, therefore, the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. It has further been submitted that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the present case. There is no criminal history of the applicant and he is in jail since 23.09.2014.

Per contra, learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the fact that co-accused having identical role has already been released on bail.

Having given my thoughtful consideration to the submission of the learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail.

Let the applicant Rasool involved in Case Crime No.642 of 2014, Under Sections 363, 366-A, 376 I.P.C. and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act 2012, Police Station Motipur, District Bahraich, 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 evidence.

2. The applicant will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate 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 be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.

Order Date :- 8.3.2016

Jitendra