Court allowed bail for applicant in POCSO and IPC case, accepting prima facie medical opinion that prosecutrix was a major and noting her exculpatory statement regarding free will and marriage.
Release on personal bond and two sureties with conditions against tampering, threatening witnesses, appearing in trial, and committing similar offences.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 53
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44544 of 2018
Applicant :- Suneel Singh
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Anjani Kumar Raghuvanshi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Suneel Singh in connection with Case Crime No. 153 of 2018 under Sections 363, 366, 368, 376, 506, 507, 120-B IPC and Section 3/4 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, P.S. Cholapur, District Varanasi.
Heard Sri Anjani Kumar Raghuvanshi, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri D.P.S. Chauhan, learned AGA appearing on behalf of the State.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the prosecutrix is a major. He has invited the attention of the Court to the medico legal estimation of her age done by the Chief Medical Officer, Varanasi, a copy of which is available in the case diary produced by the learned AGA. The said age certificate, issued by the Chief Medical Officer, Varanasi, is a document dated 17.08.2018 which indicates that, in the opinion of the Chief Medical Officer, Varanasi based on ossification test, the prosecutrix is aged about 18-19 years. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that looking to the said medico legal opinion, the prosecutrix is clearly a major, and, the provisions of the POCSO Act would not at all be attracted. He has further invited the attention of the Court to the statement of the prosecutrix under Section 164 Cr.P.C. In the said statement, the prosecutrix has though claimed herself to be under the age of 18 years, she has stated that she went with the applicant Suneel Singh of her free will, and, married the applicant. She has further stated that she would not marry the applicant contrary to the wishes of her parents, and, she would do it after she turns 18. She has further stated that during time the prosecutrix eloped with the applicant to Gujrat which was at her instance, the applicant and the prosecutrix did not have any sexual contact or physical relations. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that looking to the aforesaid statement, that is clearly exculpatory, besides the medico legal evidence about the prosecutrix's age, no case whatsoever is made out against the applicant.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but does not dispute the fact that according to the medico legal estimation of age, the prosecutrix prima facie appears to be a major, and, that the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is exculpatory.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, in particular, the fact that the prosecutrix is prima facie a major and the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. is exculpatory, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.
Let the applicant Suneel Singh involved in Case Crime No. 153 of 2018 under Sections 363, 366, 368, 376, 506, 507, 120-B IPC and Section 3/4 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, P.S. Cholapur, District Varanasi be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.
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 such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the complainant would be free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.
Order Date :- 22.11.2018
Deepak
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in a case involving offences under POCSO Act and IPC given prima facie evidence that the prosecutrix is a major and her exculpatory statement.
Suneel Singh
J.J. Munir J.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
