Manoj Nishad v. State of U.P.

Court No. - 55

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37110 of 2018

Applicant :- Manoj Nishad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.

Heard Sri Pankaj Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material brought on record.

The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant has been falsely implicated due to ulterior motive. Further submission is that applicant did not entice away the victim. As a matter of fact, victim was a consenting party and had gone with applicant out of her own sweet, and there is no allegation of any wrong committed by the applicant, which is apparent from her statement under section 164 Cr.PC. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. Further submission is that applicant who is in jail since 17.8.2018, has no other criminal history and there is also no possibility of his either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. Applicant also undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted.

Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer.

I have perused the statement of the victim recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C., considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.