Allahabad High Court
Saroj vs State Of U.P. & Another on 26 August, 2021
Bench: Saurabh Lavania
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 16
Case :- BAIL No. - 8707 of 2020
Applicant :- Saroj
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. & Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Jalaj Kumar Gupta,Rizwanul Haque Ansari
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
Hard copies of bail application and counter affidavit filed by learned AGA in the Court today are taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No. 0242/2020, under Sections- 363, 366, 376 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station- Dhaurahra, District- Lakhimpur Kheri with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
Learned counsel for applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and he has falsely been implicated in the instant case. He further submitted that in this case, initially the FIR was lodged against the applicant and three unknown persons. As per the allegations made in the FIR, the applicant and other co-accused enticed away the daughter of the informant. The FIR was lodged on 08.06.2020 at 23.08 hours.
After being recovered, the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C, wherein, she specifically stated that she reached the house/residence of the applicant and she is having love affair with him. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that before the competent Court of law, the statement of victim was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., wherein, she stated that she on her own will/volition went to the house/residence of the applicant and she is having love affair with him and she does not want to live with her parents.
Before the doctor concerned, the victim has also stated that on my own free will/volition, I have made relations with the applicant and the applicant is not having any fault. Moreover, as per the opinion of the doctor, no offence as alleged by the prosecution is made out against the applicant.
Before the Court, a specific statement regarding the age was given by the victim, according to which, the victim is major. However, the prosecution has submitted charge-sheet against the applicant. It is on account of date of birth of the victim mentioned in her mark sheet of Class 5th. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that there is discrepancy in date of birth as according to the mark sheet of the victim of Class 5th, she is minor and as per her statement before the Court below, she is major. He further submitted that as per the opinion of doctor, the age of the victim is 16 years, as such, benefit should be given to the applicant in the light of the judgment dated 23.07.2015 of the Division Bench of this Court passed in MISC. BENCH No. 3519 of 2015 (Shaheen Parveen And Anr. v. The State Of U.P Thru Principal Secy., Home Deptt., And Ors.). He also stated that the issue of age is subject to evidence adduced by the parties before the Court below, as there exists inconsistency between the date of birth as pointed out hereinabove.
Learned counsel for applicant further submitted that applicant is in jail since 13.09.2020 and he has no criminal history/antecedents. In these circumstances, the instant application for bail may be allowed and the applicant may be released on bail.
It is lastly submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned AGA learned has opposed the prayer for bail, however, she could not dispute neither the statements given by the victim nor the law laid down by this Court in the case of Shaheen Parveen (supra).
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, the period for which the applicant is in jail as also the statements of the victim and the law laid down by this Court in the case of Shaheen Parveen (supra) and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.
Let the applicant- Saroj involved in aforesaid Case Crime Number 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 which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(1) Applicant will not try to influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence of the case or otherwise misuse the liberty of bail.
(2) Applicant will fully cooperate in expeditious disposal of the case and shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when witnesses are present in the Court.
(3) Applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (a) opening of the case, (b) framing of charge; and (c) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C.
(4) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
(5) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
(6) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 26.8.2021
Arun/-
