Allahabad High Court
Satrudhan Singh Alias Siddu vs State Of Up And 3 Others on 1 July, 2024
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:105637
Court No. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16262 of 2024
Applicant :- Satrudhan Singh Alias Siddu
Opposite Party :- State Of Up And 3 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Sachin Kumar Sharma
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 26.04.2024.
3. Heard Shri Sachin Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
4. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.313 of 2023, under Sections 376 (3), 354, 504 I.P.C., Sections 3/4 (2) and 7/8 POCSO Act and Sections 3 (2) (Va), 3 (2) (V) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Shahbad, District Rampur, during the pendency of trial.
5. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have enticed away the minor daughter of the informant on 17.12.2023 at about 3:30 p.m. and had taken her to the mustard field and committed indecent act with her and had even hurled abuses at her including casteist remarks.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The said FIR itself has been instituted after a delay of about one day and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The allegations in the FIR are regarding outraging the modesty of the victim only, but subsequently the same have been inflated to that of rape during the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. The said statement has been garnered after tutoring and legal consultation. Learned counsel has further stated that the said statement and the FIR itself indicates that the applicant had administered some alcohol, whereby under the influence of alcohol, the said act is stated to have been committed. No offence under SC/ST Act is made out as the said abuses or act has not been committed at a public place.
7. In compliance of the order of this Court dated 23.05.2024, the ossification test report of the victim has been furnished by the leaned A.G.A. before this Court, which indicates that the age of the victim is 16 years.
8. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that as per the ossification test report also, a leverage of two years may be granted to the applicant on the upper sidein 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.
9. 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 22.12.2023. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
10. Per contra, learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application.
11. 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.
12. Let the applicant-Satrudhan Singh Alias Siddu 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.
13. 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.
14. 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 :- 1.7.2024
Ravi/-
(Justice Krishan Pahal)
