Allahabad High Court
Surjeet vs State Of U.P. on 11 January, 2021
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Singh-I
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 76
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36293 of 2020
Applicant :- Surjeet
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Kuldeep Johri
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Suresh Dhar Dwivedi
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Kuldeep Jorhi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Suresh Dhar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the informant as well as Sri Suraj Singh, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
This bail application has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No.140 of 2020 under sections 376, 452 I.P.C. and section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Paraur, District Shahjahanpur, during the pendency of trial.
As per FIR, which has been lodged by the brother of the victim, the prosecution case is that on 26.5.2020 at about 12 noon when he had gone to his relative's house and mother was out of the house for picking mangoes and his sister (victim) was alone, the accused entered the house and committed rape upon her against her wishes and when victim cried loudly, the informant's Bhabi Smt. Geeta and mother of the victim suddenly reached there then the accused fled from the place of occurrence. When the informant returned home, he was told about this occurrence by his mother as well as his Bhabi.
The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that on the very next day, medical examination was conducted and nothing adverse has been found against him and there is no sign of force found to have exerted upon the victim though hymen is recorded as old torn. He has also drawn attention to the radiological report in which her age is recorded about 18 years which is annexed at page-17 of the paper book. Further, he has drawn attention to the judgment passed in Criminal Case No.425 of 2013 arising out of case crime no. 23 of 2002 under sections 323, 325, 504 IP.C, P.S. Paraur, District Shahjahanpur, in which the uncle of the applicant was named accused and he has been acquitted. It is further argued on the basis of the evidence that because of the applicant being relative of the victim and there being some dispute also, earlier his uncle was implicated and thereafter threat was given that the applicant would be implicated falsely and in view of that the present false implication has been made. It is further argued that in the statement under section 164 Cr.P.C, the victim has not supported the prosecution version. The applicant is not involved in any other criminal case. The applicant is absolutely innocent and is languishing in jail since 27.5.2020. In case the applicant is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and it is argued by the learned counsel for the informant that in the bail rejection order the date of birth of the victim is recorded as 20.7.2004 on the basis of educational certificate by which she would be just about 16 years, hence she was minor on the date of occurrence, therefore, bail should be rejected.
In the light of the aforesaid arguments, looking to the fact that there was animosity between the two sides, hence false implication cannot be ruled out, taking into consideration the nature of offence, quantum of punishment and period of detention in jail,,without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, it is found to be a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Surjeet involved in aforesaid case crime 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 that :-
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.
Taking into consideration that Covid-19 is continuing and due to which certified copy would not be possible to be obtained by the applicant, therefore, if a copy of this order downloaded from the official website of Allahabad High Court and self attested by the counsel for the applicant is placed before the Court, the same would be entertained.
Order Date :- 11.1.2021
AU
