Allahabad High Court
Navneet Rajbhar vs State Of U.P. on 27 May, 2022
Bench: Saurabh Lavania
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11330 of 2022
Applicant :- Navneet Rajbhar
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Raghvendra Prakash,Arvind Kumar Bhardwaj
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant seeking bail in Case Crime No.16 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366 IPC, P.S. Mehnajpur, Districtd Azamgarh.
Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the allegations levelled against the applicant in the FIR are completely false and concocted. It is stated that as per the allegations made in the FIR, the daughter and niece of the informant were enticed away by the applicant, his father, mother, maternal grandfather and maternal grandmother. The FIR in respect of the said incident which took place on 23.1.2022 at 3 p.m. was lodged on 25.1.2022. There is delay in lodging the FIR, which is fatal to the story of the prosecution.
Further submission is that victims were recovered and their statements were recorded by the investigating officer and it appears therefrom that the victims on her own volition left their house and reached Gorakhpur and there both met with the applicant and levelled allegations against the applicant to the effect that on asking by the present applicant, victims along with the applicant went to Gujarat. It is further submitted that these statements of the victims were recorded before the court in terms of Section 164 Cr.P.C. From the statements of the victims, it is evident that victims on their own volition went to Gujarat along with the applicant for the purposes of employment and they contacted their father on account of the financial crunch. It also appears that applicant was known to one of the victim, however, nothing wrong was committed by the applicant with the victims.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail and contended that the victims were minor at the time of incident and as such their consent is wholly immaterial in the eye of law. Therefore, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail.
In response, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that as per the High School Certificate, one victim was major at relevant time and another victim was about 17 years, 6 months and 8 days, however, as per the medical opinion, both the victims were major at relevant time. Thus, there is discrepancy in the age of the victims as indicated in the High School Certificate as also in the medical opinion. As such, at the stage of bail, the benefit of the judgments of this Court as also of Hon'ble Apex Court on the issue of determination of age is liable to be extended in favour of the applicant. The age indicated by prosecution is subject to the evidence adduced by the parties before the court concerned. The applicant is in jail since 03.02.2022 and the possibility of conclusion of trial in near future is extremely bleak.
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 statements of victims as also the age of the victims and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.
Let applicant- Navneet Rajbhar 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 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 :- 27.5.2022
M. Tarik
