This bail application was allowed. The court observed that while offenses of kidnapping and forcible marriage were alleged, the applicant had no criminal history and there was a lack of independent prosecution evidence. The application was disposed of as a fit case for bail subject to standard conditions.
Bail granted on personal bond with two sureties each.
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. - 22 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7035 of 2018 Applicant :- Hariom Chauhan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Aniruddha Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
According to prosecution case, F.I.R. was lodged on 7.11.2017 by the informant against three accused persons namely, Hariom Chauhan, Laxmina Devi and Dharmendra alleging that on 22.10.2017 they kidnapped the daughter of Shambhu Chauhan and compelled her for marriage.
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that there is no evidence to connect the applicant with the present matter. Entire prosecution story is false and concocted. There is no independent witness. The applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. In the statement recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C. the prosecutrix has stated that no one has kidnapped her. She has also stated that she had gone with the applicant on her own sweet will and her consent and got married with the applicant. In case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail; he is in jail since 4.1.2018 (more than one and half months) having no criminal history.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid fact as argued by learned counsel for the applicant and admitted that applicant has no criminal history.
Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, facts of the case, nature of allegation and period of custody, gravity of offence, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for bail. Hence the bail application is hereby allowed.
Let the applicant Hariom Chauhan involved in the Case Crime No. 830 of 2017, under Sections 363, 366 IPC, P.S. Kotwali Padrauna, District Kushinagar be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:
2.The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
3.The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
4.The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
5.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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 23.2.2018//A. Singh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is eligible for bail in a case involving kidnapping and forcible marriage.
Whether the lack of independent prosecution evidence and the applicant's innocence justify grant of bail.
Hariom Chauhan
State Of U.P.
Aniruddha Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
