Allahabad High Court
Akhilesh Yadav vs State Of U.P. on 1 August, 2019
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30881 of 2019
Applicant :- Akhilesh Yadav
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ravi Sahu
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Ravi Sahu, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pankaj Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Akhilesh Yadav with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 107 of 2019, under Sections 452, 354A (1), 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(10) S.C./S.T. Act and Section 8 POCSO Act, Police Station- Mangalpur, District- Kanpur Dehat, during pendency of trial.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that there is a dispute with respect to money between the parties, due to which the present F.I.R. has been lodged after a delay of about 14 days without giving any plausible explanation for the same, which makes the prosecution story doubtful. It is further argued that as per the allegations made in the F.I.R., on 02.04.2019 at 01:00 p.m., when the victim was going to field, the applicant caught her with bad intention and tried to molest her. Thereafter, when the victim ran away inside her house to save herself, the applicant also entered her house and started beating her, however, the victim herself has refused to get herself internally medically examined, which makes the prosecution story false and concocted. As per the medical report, she is aged about 18 years. The applicant is languishing in jail since 11.06.2019. The applicant does not have any previous criminal history. In case, he is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial by all means. Lastly, it is submitted that there is no chance of applicant fleeing away from judicial process or tampering with the witnesses.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
Considering the material/evidence brought on record, the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
3. The applicant 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 :- 1.8.2019
JK Yadav
