Allahabad High Court
Ajay Kumar 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. - 30832 of 2019
Applicant :- Ajay Kumar
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anand Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Anand Kumar Singh, 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, Ajay Kumar with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 130 of 2019, under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C. and Section 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station- Kokhraj, District- Kaushambi, during pendency of trial.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that initially the F.I.R. has been lodged U/s 363 I.P.C. against unknown person regarding missing of the victim. Subsequently, after investigation, the charge sheet has come under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C. and Section 7/8 of POCSO Act, therefore, the present bail application has been filed under the aforesaid sections. It is further argued that the victim has been recovered safely and her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded in which she has stated that she used to talk to applicant on telephone and she voluntarily went with him to Delhi where she stayed for about two days, thereafter, she returned. She has not stated anything against the applicant. As per the medical report, she is aged about 16-17 years. The law is settled that the margin of error in ascertaining the age by radiological examination is two years on either side and hence the possibility of the victim being major cannot be ruled out. The applicant is languishing in jail since 12.06.2019. 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
