Allahabad High Court
Chandan Gaud vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 17 March, 2023
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 79
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 4239 of 2023
Applicant :- Chandan Gaud
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Vipin Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Learned A.G.A. has informed that the notice to the informant has been served on 27.01.2023.
3. Heard Shri Vipin Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant as well as Shri V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.129 of 2022, under Sections 342, 354, 376, 120-B I.P.C. & Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Kachhwa, District Mirzapur, during the pendency of trial.
5. As per prosecution story, the applicant and other co-accused person Rakesh Bind are said to have forcibly caught hold of the two daughters of the informant whereby the younger one is stated to have run away from their clutches and informed the informant about the said incident, whereby the applicant and co-accused person are stated to have outraged the modesty of the elder daughter of the informant on 06.09.2022 at about 1:00 AM. When the informant and his aunt reached there, the applicant is stated to have opened the door and run away from the scene of occurrence alongwith the co-accused person.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The FIR is delayed by six days and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The victim is a consenting party as is evident from her statement recorded by the treating doctor at the time of her medical examination. The statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has been recorded at a belated stage, whereby she has stated that she was in love with the applicant and had gone to his house on his own and lived there as husband wife. Learned counsel has further stated that as per her own statement, the age of the victim was 16 years at the time of offence and a leverage of two years may be granted to the applicant on the upper side in light of the judgment of the Apex Court. The applicant himself is a 24 years old boy and was in love with the victim. The co-accused person Rakesh Bind has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 22.02.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.52260 of 2022. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 12.09.2022. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
7. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application and has stated that as per school certificate of the victim, her date of birth is 03.05.2010, as such she was well below the age of consent.
8. In rebuttal, learned counsel for the applicant has placed much reliance on the judgment of Apex Court in Sushil Kumar vs. Rakesh Kumar, (2003) 8 SCC 673, wherein it has been stated that it is more often in the Indian Society that person shows the age of their wards much below than their actual age.
9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
10. Let the applicant- Chandan Gaud involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.
(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
(ii). The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
(iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected of the commission of which he is suspected.
(v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
11. 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.
12. It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
Order Date :- 17.3.2023
Ravi Kant
