Allahabad High Court
Jahid vs State Of U.P. And Others on 3 August, 2022
Bench: Saurabh Lavania
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 11
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 10072 of 2021
Applicant :- Jahid
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Kanaujia,Nouphil Ahmad
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
As per Office Report dated 06.10.2021, service of notice on opposite party No. 2 is sufficient. However, no one appeared on behalf of opposite party No. 2 to oppose this bail application. Learned AGA representing State of U.P. is present in the Court. In these circumstances, the Court proceeded to hear the case on merits.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant in Case Crime No. 279 of 2017, under Sections- 363, 366, 376 IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station- Hasanganj, District- Unnao with a prayer to enlarge him on bail.
While pressing the application for bail, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 11.08.2017 and till date, the trial has not been concluded, though, as per Section 35 of POCSO Act, the trial is liable to be concluded within a period of one year from the date of framing of charges.
Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. The reason of false implication is to the effect that the applicant and informant/complainant were doing agricultural work together and in order to grab the share of applicant, he has been implicated in instant case. It is submitted that at the time of recovery of victim, the applicant was not accompanying her and as per arrest memo, the applicant was arrested from his house.
Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that as per statement of victim under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the applicant enticed away the victim and established physical relations with her. However, before the Court concerned, the victim has stated that while she was going to school, the applicant abducted her in a tempo and thereafter, the applicant kept her in a room and established physical relations and the police recovered the victim from the said room. However, as per recovery memo, the victim was recovered from Puchda Tiraha. Thus, the story of prosecution is not intact and is doubtful.
Further submission is that medical examination report of victim does not support the story of prosecution. In this regard, reliance has been placed on Annexure No. 4 to counter affidavit filed by State.
To support the fact that the applicant has been falsely implicated, learned counsel for the applicant drawn attention of this Court on the statement of eye-witness namely Bablu and based upon the same, he stated that it is apparent from the statement that the applicant and informant/complainant were jointly doing agricultural work. Further this witness has also stated before the Investigating Officer that the victim was going with the applicant and this part of the statement falsifies the statements of victim, as per which, the applicant enticed away the victim as also abducted her. In these circumstances, the prayer is allow bail application and release the applicant on bail.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail. He submitted that at relevant point of time, the victim was minor. Learned A.G.A., however, could not dispute the above contentions made by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant particularly based upon the medical opinion and statements of victim.
In response, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the victim in fact was not minor. She always presented herself as major. He submitted that the age of victim is subject to evidence adduced by the parties before the trial Court. At this stage of bail, the benefit of pronouncements of Apex Court as well as of this Court in regard to determination of age shall be extended in favour of the applicant. In this regard, reliance has been placed on the judgment dated 03.08.2018 passed in HABEAS CORPUS No. 21284 of 2018 (Deepa through her next friend Mithun v. State of U.P. and others).
It is also submitted that there is no apprehension that after being released on bail, the applicant may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty of bail and he will cooperate in trial.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in mind the period of incarceration, medical opinion as well as statements of victim & eye-witness and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.
Let the applicant- Jahid be released on bail in aforesaid Case Crime, on his furnishing personal bond to the satisfaction of the court concerned forthwith. Applicant is also directed to furnish two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
(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.
(3) Applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed.
(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 :- 3.8.2022
Arun/-
