Allahabad High Court
Akhilesh Prajapati @ Munshi vs State Of U.P. And Anr. on 26 July, 2022
Bench: Saurabh Lavania
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 11
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7761 of 2021
Applicant :- Akhilesh Prajapati @ Munshi
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Ahmad
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
As per Office Report dated 13.08.2021, service on opposite party No. 2 is sufficient. However, no one appeared on behalf of opposite party No. 2 to oppose this application. Learned AGA appearing on behalf of State 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. 209 of 2019, under Sections- 363, 366, 376 IPC, 3/4 POCSO Act & 3(1)(d), 3(1)(dh), 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act, Police Station- Tikait Nagar, District- Barabanki with a prayer to enlarge him on bail.
While pressing the application for bail, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that for committing no crime, the applicant is languishing in jail since 21.12.2020 and possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is bleak.
It is stated that initially the FIR was lodged under Sections 363, 366 IPC & 3(1)(d), 3(1)(dh), 3(2)(V) SC/ST Act. In the FIR, it has been alleged that the applicant along with co-accused Kuli s/o Kailash enticed away the daughter of informant. The allegations in the FIR are completely false and concocted as would appear from the statements of victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. A perusal of statements of victim would show that she on her volition went with the applicant to Mumbai and Gujrat and stayed with him for about two months and physical relations were also established with consent.
It is further stated that the victim was mature enough on the relevant date. She presented herself as major. As per the opinion of doctor concerned she was 17 years old at the relevant time. In her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she stated that she is 17 years old and she is not aware regarding date of birth. Further submission is that the document in relation to age relied upon by the prosecution is liable to be disbelieved as the same was obtained after lodging of instant FIR. Thus, the age indicated by the prosecution is in dispute and being so, the same is subject to the 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 passed in HABEAS CORPUS No. 21284 of 2018 (Deepa through her next friend Mithun v. State of U.P. and others). It is also stated that medical opinion does not support the story of prosecution. In these circumstances, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
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.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he could not dispute the above contentions made by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant particularly the statements of victim under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. and medical opinion.
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 as also the statements of victim under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. and medical opinion 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- Akhilesh Prajapati @ Munshi 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 :- 26.7.2022/Arun/-
