Vikas Rajbhar Vs State of U.P. and Another

¶1

Court No. - 70 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40341 of 2021 Applicant :- Vikas Rajbhar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Brijesh Kumar Mishra,Dilendra Pratap Singh,Umesh Kumar Vishwakarma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.

¶3

By means of this bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No. 115 of 2020 (Session Case No. 442 of 2020) at Police Station Khampar, District Deoria under Sections 363, 366A, 376 IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act. The applicant is in jail since 11.09.2020.

¶4

The bail application of the applicant was rejected by learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Deoria, on 22.07.2021.

¶5

Sri Umesh Kumar Vishwakarma, learned counsel for the applicant contend that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The age of the victim is incorrectly depicted as 16 years in the FIR. The medical report to determine the age of the victim opines that she is 18 years of age. The victim is infact a major. The applicant and the victim were intimate. Their consensual relationship was opposed by the family members of the victim. The FIR is a result of such opposition and the criminal prosecution is intended to create a breach in their relationship. The victim in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has admitted to intimacy with the applicant. She has further asserted that she eloped with the applicant of her own volition. They travelled together by public transport to various places and resided for one month at Siwan in a

¶6

rented accommodation. The two established consensual physical relationship. No allegation of abduction, rape or forceful assault has been made against the applicant by the victim in the aforesaid statement. Medical evidence to corroborate rape or forceful assault has not been produced by the prosecution. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant does not have any criminal history apart from the instant case.

¶7

Learned AGA for the State could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions.

¶8

I see merit in the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant and accordingly hold that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶9

In the light of the preceding discussion and without making any observations on the merits of the case, the bail application is allowed.

¶10

Let the applicant- Vikas Rajbhar be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court below. The following conditions be imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶11

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶12

(ii) The applicant will not influence any witness.

¶13

(iii) The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.

¶14

(iv) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make 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 to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶15

In case any averment made in the bail application or the submissions during the course of argument are found to be false or in case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.

¶16

Order Date :- 25.7.2022 Pravin

¶17

Digitally signed by PRAVIN VERMA Date: 2022.07.26 16:50:57 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Vikas Rajbhar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vikas Rajbhar 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

Vikash @ Rahul Vs State of U.P.

Dinesh Vs State of U.P.

Devendra Singh @ Dev Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Prem Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P.

Mansingh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Lakshmi Devi @ Mami @ Sethani Vs State of U.P.