Allahabad High Court
Samit Lal Kol Alias Sumit Lal Kol vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 21 March, 2025
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:41582
Court No. - 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 9558 of 2025
Applicant :- Samit Lal Kol Alias Sumit Lal Kol
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Aaditya Dhar Dweevedi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Sri Aaditya Dhar Dweevedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pranshu Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant is permitted to undertake the necessary corrections in the memorandum of bail application during the course of the day.
4. Learned A.G.A. has informed that the notice to the informant has been served on 08.03.2025.
5. Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.39 of 2024, under Sections 363, 376(2)(N) I.P.C. and 5(L)/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Shankargarh, District Prayagraj, during the pendency of trial.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The victim is a consenting party as is but evident from her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C.. She has not nominated the applicant in the said statement, although she has nominated the applicant in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. She by her looks seems to be major, although as per class 5th school certificate, her date of birth is 22.04.2009, as such, her age comes out to be 14 years, 9 months and 28 days. Learned counsel has further stated that the said document is hit by Section 94 of Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, as such, cannot be taken into consideration in light of the judgment of Supreme Court passed in P. Yuvaprakash vs State Rep. by Inspector of Police, AIR 2023 SC 3525.
7. Learned counsel for the applicant has further stated that the victim has not raised any alarm whatsoever and has gone on her own sweet will all the way from Prayagraj to Ahmedabad, as such, she is a consenting party. 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 17.04.2024 and he 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 Supreme Court in the case of Niranjan Singh and another vs. Prabhakar Rajaram Kharote and Others, AIR 1980 SC 785 has avoided detailed examination of the evidence and elaborate documentation of the merits of the case as no party should have the impression that his case has been prejudiced. A prima facie satisfaction of case is needed but it is not the same as an exhaustive exploration of the merits in the order itself.
10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, the evidence on record, and taking into consideration the settled law of the Supreme Court passed in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors., 2022 INSC 690 and Manish Sisodia vs. Directorate of Enforcement, 2024 INSC 595 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.
11. Let the applicant-Samit Lal Kol Alias Sumit Lal Kol, 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./351 B.N.S.S. 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.
12. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
13. 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 :- 21.3.2025
(Ravi Kant)
(Justice Krishan Pahal)
