Sanju v. State of U.P.

Court No. - 52

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11075 of 2018

Applicant :- Sanju Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Dhirendra Kumar Agrahari,Sudhir Mehrotra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

Counter affidavit has been filed by learned A.G.A., which is taken on record.

Heard Sri Dhirendra Kumar Agrahari and Sri Sudhir Mehrotra, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Sanju in Case Crime No. 643 of 2017, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and 4 Prevention of Children from Sexual Offence Act, Police Station- Sikandrabad, District- Bulandshahar with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case and the allegation by the first informant that the applicant had kidnapped the prosecutrix is absolutely false. He has drawn the attention of the court towards the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in which she has stated that she had left her home on her own free will as her mother is a step-mother who used to beat her. She has stated that nothing has happened with her. It is next contended that the prosecutrix has not named the applicant even in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. There is no early prospect of conclusion of trial. So, the applicant, who is in jail since 28.10.2017, having no criminal history to his credit, deserves to be released on bail.