Allahabad High Court
Santosh Kumar @ Dhakad 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. - 15618 of 2019
Applicant :- Santosh Kumar @ Dhakad
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, 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, Santosh Kumar @ Dhakad with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 262 of 2015, under Sections 323, 376, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station- Mau-Aima, District- Allahabad, during pendency of trial.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case as he was having love affair with the victim and when the father of the victim came to know about it, he has lodged a first information report against the applicant with false and frivilous allegations. There is contradiction in the statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C., which makes prosecution story doubtful. As per medical report the age of the victim is 18 years. Initially, the F.I.R. was lodged under Sections 376, 511, 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 8 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act, 2012), in which the applicant has already been granted bail vide order dated 18.02.2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.6151 of 2019. Subsequently, after investigation charge-sheet has been filed under Sections 376, 323, 452, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act showing the false implication of the applicant and violation of the statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. It is further contended that there is no possibility of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is languishing in jail since 25.08.2018.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
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
Radhika
