Ramlagan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 76

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 35109 of 2020

Applicant :- Ramlagan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Bhajan Chaudhary Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today, is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A.

¶7

This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Ramlagan in connection with Case Crime No.103 of 2020, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. read with Section 5/6 of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Kaptanganj, district Basti.

¶8

The first information report of this incident was lodged by the complainant, the father of the victim on 28.05.2020 against the applicant. The incident is alleged to have taken place on 24.05.2020 at about 00:10 hrs. and in the FIR the allegation of enticing away the minor daughter of the complainant was levelled only against the present accused.

¶9

The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is quite innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a ulterior motive. He submitted that the victim in the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has stated that she was not enticed away by the present accused. He further submitted that the alleged victim was major and was in consensual relationship with the applicant. He further submitted that the victim has not raised any alarm any-where to save herself from the clutches of the accused. He further submitted that there was no sign of violence on the person of the alleged victim. He submitted that as per medical, the alleged victim was found about 16 years, copy whereof has been annexed on page no.14 of the supplementary affidavit. He submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 30.05.2020 and in case, he is released on bail he will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in the trial.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail plea.

¶11

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, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.

¶12

Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.

¶13

Let the applicant Ramlagan involved in the aforesaid crime 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:

¶14

i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.

¶15

ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses;

¶16

iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

¶17

iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission;

¶18

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.

¶19

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the learned counsel for the applicant alongwith a self attested identity prof of the said persons (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number (s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official.

¶20

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶21

Order Date :- 1.12.2020 R./

Ramlagan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramlagan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Munish Vs State of U.P.

Mohit Vs State of U.P.

Jagdish Paswan Vs State of U.P.

Guddu @ Abhay Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Narendra Vs State of U.P.

Samir Vs State of U.P and Another