Criminal Misc. Bail Application allowed. The court held that the applicant is entitled to bail in a case involving rape and POCSO charges, without expressing an opinion on the merits, relying on the Apex Court judgement in Dataram Singh.
Release on bail by furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount.
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. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41337 of 2021
Applicant :- Balvinder Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sayeed Saif Ullah,Sufia Saba Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.
Heard Ms. Sufia Saba, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant- Balvinder with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.11 of 2021, registered under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and Section 5/6 of POCSO Act, Police Station Behat, District Saharanpur during pendency of the trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Victim left her parental home on her own sweet will and ran away with applicant and solemnized marriage with the applicant and living in her in-laws home. The victim was produced before Medical Officer, D.W.H., Saharanpur on 05.04.2021 where she refused for medical test. As per ossification test, victim is major, aged about 19 and half years. Victim alleged that her parents wants to marry her with much elder person, hence, she left her parental home on her free will and went with applicant. It appears that the victim is consenting party, hence, no allegation is made out against the applicant under the aforesaid sections. The incident took place in the intervening night of 28/29.10.2020 and the F.I.R. has been lodged on 07.01.2021 after about more than two months and there is no plausible explanation for inordinate delay, hence, its shows suspicion in the matter. The applicant has no previous criminal antecedents. There is no prospect of trial of the present case being concluded in near future due to heavy dockets. It is next submitted that there is no possibility of fleeing away of the applicant from the judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is also contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 10.08.2021.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and the statement of the victim under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C., medical report regarding age of the victim and evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused and the view laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the applicant- Balvinder, who is involved in the aforesaid case crime, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified :-
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 3.12.2021 Nitin Verma
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is entitled to bail in a case involving Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and POCSO Act.
Whether the alleged delay in FIR and lack of prospects of quick trial warrant granting bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and anotherReferred¶9
(2018) 3 SCC 22 · Who else cites this
Balvinder
State of U.P.
Deepak Verma
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
