Allahabad High Court
Mukesh vs State Of U.P. on 27 May, 2024
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:95759
Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20698 of 2024
Applicant :- Mukesh
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashwani Kumar Pathak
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Ashwani Kumar Pathak, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri R.P. Patel, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.172 of 2024, under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C., Police Station- Bansgaon, District- Gorakhpur, during the pendency of trial.
4. As per prosecution case, the applicant is stated to have enticed away the minor daughter of the informant aged about 15 years on 4.4.2024 at about 01:00 p.m.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. The FIR was instituted after delay of twelve hours and there is no explanation of the said delay caused. The victim is a consenting party as is evident from her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., whereby she has stated that she had gone with the applicant to the house of his paternal aunt and remained there for seven days and she was not subjected to any kind of sexual assault. She has shown willingness to stay with his parents. Learned counsel has further stated that as per school certificate the age of the victim is stated to be 15 years and eight months, as such by appearance the victim seems to be major. The applicant himself is a young boy of 19 years.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed much reliance on the judgment of Supreme 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. In the case of Brij Mohan Singh vs. Priya Brat Narain Sinha, AIR 1965 SC 282, this Court, inter alia, observed that in actual life it often happens that persons give false age of the boy at the time of his admission to a school so that later in life he would have an advantage when seeking public service for which a minimum age for eligibility is often prescribed. It is also settled by Supreme Court that as per the medical records, a leverage of two years may be granted to the accused person.
7. 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. It is further stated that there is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 5.4.2024. The applicant is ready to cooperate with trial. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
8. Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application.
9. The well-known principle of "Presumption of Innocence Unless Proven Guilty," gives rise to the concept of bail as a rule and imprisonment as an exception. A person's right to life and liberty, guaranteed by Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, cannot be taken away simply because he or she is accused of committing an offence until the guilt is established beyond a reasonable doubt. Article 21 of the Indian Constitution states that no one's life or personal liberty may be taken away unless the procedure established by law is followed, and the procedure must be just and reasonable. The said principle has been reiterated by the Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825. Learned AGA has not shown any exceptional circumstances which would warrant denial of bail to the applicant.
10. It is settled principle of law that the object of bail is to secure the attendance of the accused at the trial. No material particulars or circumstances suggestive of the applicant fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like have been shown by learned AGA for the State.
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- Mukesh, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the Trial Court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the Trial Court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
13. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
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 :- 27.5.2024
Vikas
(Justice Krishan Pahal)
