Ikrar v. State of U.P.

Court No. - 51 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7670 of 2018 Applicant :- Ikrar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Perdeep Kumar Vishnoi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Vipin Sinha,J.

Office is directed to correct the name of the applicant as "Arkam" in place of "Ikrar" in the computer record, in pursuance of order of this Court dated 27.02.2018.

Heard Sri Perdeep Kumar Vishnoi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant and Sri Yogeshwar Rai, learned A. G. A. for the State.

This bail application moved on behalf of applicant praying to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No.134 of 2017, under Sections 366, 376, IPC, Police Station Thakurdwara, District Moradabad.

It has been contended by the counsel for the applicant that in the impugned FIR which has been lodged by the father of the victim, three persons have been named and similarly in the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. three persons have also been named. However, subsequently, the statement of the girl was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., in which it has been mentioned that she is 19 years of age and in consensual relationship with Arkam, the present applicant. Subsequently some dispute arose between the girl and present applicant with regard to solemnization of marriage, hence the present proceeding has been initiated against the applicant. The further contention is that the applicant is languishing in jail since 13.09.2017, with no previous criminal history.

Learned AGA appearing for the State opposed the prayer for bail, but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.