Allahabad High Court
Satendra Alias Aakash vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 12 July, 2023
Bench: Ajay Bhanot
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:137818
Court No. - 66
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28222 of 2023
Applicant :- Satendra Alias Aakash
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Rahul Mehrotra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Abhay Pratap Singh,Avaneesh Kumar Upadhyay
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
Ms. Sujata Choudhary, learned A.G.A. for the State contends that the police authorities in compliance of the directions issued by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 46998 of 2020 (Junaid Vs State of U.P. and another) reported at 2021 (6) ADJ 511 and with a view to implement the provisions of POCSO Act, 2012 read with POCSO Rules, 2020, have served notices of the bail application upon the the victim as well as the CWC.
By means of the the bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 46 of 2023 at Police Station- Malawan, District- Etah, under Sections 363, 366, 376-D, 506, 120-B IPC, Section 3/4 POCSO Act. The applicant is in jail since 05.05.2023.
The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned trial court on 15.06.2023.
The following arguments made by Shri Rahul Mehrotra, learned counsel on behalf of the applicant,which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Ms. Sujata Choudhary, learned AGA and Sri Avaneesh Kumar Upadhyay, learned counsel for the informant from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:
(1). The applicant has contested the minority of the victim as stated in the prosecution case.
(2). The victim has been wrongly depicted as minor only to falsely implicate the applicant under the stringent provisions of POCSO Act and cause his imprisonment.
(3). The age of the victim is assailed on the following grounds in light of the judgment rendered by this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 55026 of 2021 (Monish Vs State of U.P. and others).
(i). The age of the victim was incorrectly entered by her parents in the school records only to give her an advantage in life. School records depicting age of the victim as 17 years are unreliable.
(ii). The victim is in fact a major. However no medical examination to determine the correct age as per duly established medical protocol was got done by expert doctors from a reputed institute as the same would establish the majority of the victim and falsify the prosecution case.
(4). The delay in lodgment of the FIR in the facts and circumstances of this case is fatal to the prosecution case.
(5). The applicant was not named in the FIR.
(6). The applicant and the victim were intimate.
(7). The FIR is a result of parental opposition of the victim's family to the said relationship.
(8). False and aggravated allegations were made against the applicant at the behest of her parents by the victim in her statement under Section 161 CrPC.
(9). However, a contradictory stand was taken by the victim in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. against four accused persons including the grandfather of the applicant. It is noteworthy that no allegation of commission of rape was made by the victim against the applicant in the said statement.
(10). Material contradictions in the FIR, statements of the victim under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. discredit the prosecution case.
(11). The applicant does not have any criminal history apart from this case.
(12). The applicant is not a flight risk. The applicant being a law abiding citizen has always cooperated with the investigation and undertakes to cooperate with the court proceedings. There is no possibility of his influencing witnesses, tampering with the evidence or reoffending.
In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant- Satendra Alias Aakash be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence or influence any witness during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
Order Date :- 12.7.2023
Pravin
