Allahabad High Court
Pankaj vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 1 July, 2024
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:105625
Court No. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 14933 of 2024
Applicant :- Pankaj
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Abhay Pratap Singh,Indrajeet Chaurasia
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Sri Anit Kumar Shukla, learned A.G.A. has informed that the notice has been served to the informant.
3. Heard Shri Abhay Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.817 of 2023, under Sections 363, 376AB I.P.C. and Sections 5M/6 Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Sikandrabad, District Bulandshahr, during the pendency of trial.
5. As per prosecution story, some unknown persons are stated to have enticed away the minor daughter of the informant on 24.11.2023 when she had left her house without informing anybody.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is not named in the FIR and has been falsely implicated in the present case. His name has come up later on during the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The FIR is delayed by about one day and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. Learned counsel has further stated that there is major discrepancy in the age of the victim as her father has indicated it to be 12 years in the FIR, but no medical examination of the victim has been conducted.
7. This Court had ordered for getting the victim medically examined for ascertaining her to age.
8. The ossification test report has been received in a sealed cover, which reveals that her age is between 15-16 years.
9. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the statement of the victim indicates that she is a consenting party and she has categorically stated that the applicant has not used any force with the victim. The FIR has been instituted as both the parties belong to different communities. 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 04.12.2023. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
10.Learned counsel for the applicant has also stated that as per ossification test report, the age of the victim was 16 years and a leverage of two years may be granted to the applicant on the upper side in the light of the judgment of theSupreme Court passed in Jaya Mala vs. State of J & K, (1982) 2 SCC 538 and Mohd. Imran Khan vs. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), (2011) 10 SCC 192, whereby it has been opined that the radiologist cannot predict the correct date of birth rather there is a long margin of 1 to 2 years on either side.
11. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application but could not dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicant.
12. 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.
13. Let the applicant-Pankaj involved in aforementioned case crime number be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two 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.
14. 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.
15. 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.
16. The report received in a sealed cover shall be returned to the C.M.O. concerned after retaining photostat copies of the same.
Order Date :- 1.7.2024
Ravi/-
(Justice Krishan Pahal)
