Allahabad High Court
Mukesh Kumar Yadav vs State Of U.P. on 6 August, 2019
Author: Vikas Kunvar Srivastav
Bench: Vikas Kunvar Srivastav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Court No. - 29 Case :- BAIL No. - 7522 of 2019 Applicant :- Mukesh Kumar Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar Pandey,Babu Ram Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vikas Kunvar Srivastav,J.
Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This bail application has been moved on behalf of the accused-applicant/Mukesh Kumar Yadav in Case Crime No. 455 of 2018, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. & 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Kotwali Bikapur, District Faizabad during pendency of trial.
Learned counsel for accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that the accused-applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case and the whole story as alleged by the prosecution is fabricated and concocted.
Learned counsel for the bail-applicant argues that the victim was in continuous contact with the accused-applicant and they were fallen in love affair and, therefore, she left her house on her own along with accused-applicant and had married with her.
With regard to bail-applicant, learned counsel for the bail-applicant drew attention towards the statement of the victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. recorded by the Investigating Officer and also towards statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. before the concerned Magistrate when she was recovered and produced before the court. In earlier statement, she has admitted her contact with the accused is admitted for a continuous period of last two years. Whereas, nature of allegation made in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. to the contrary that accused used to contact her forcibly on telephone under threats, and forcibly taken her away when she went out from her parental house to get ease herself on 23.11.2018 in the night. This statement is inconsistent with her earlier statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C.
Learned counsel for the applicant further argues that the girl after having been recovered from his custody is in the custody of her mother and after a considerable lapse of time, her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded under the influence of her parents. The accused is in Jail since long back for a year. The investigation has now been completed, therefore, he should be given a fair opportunity to defend himself in the trial.
Sri Virendra Mohan, learned A.G.A. while opposing the bail submits that the offence under Section 363 stands constituted for the simple reason that the girl is minor who is medically examined. The consensus or consent alleged to have been given by the victim is immaterial. So far as the offence under Section 366 is concerned, it will also stands constituted by the prima facie evidence collected by the police because the girl is minor. In her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she stated about her forceful marriage and making physical relation with her by the accused-applicant.
The fact that investigation has now been completed and charge sheet has been submitted in the present case, it would be just and proper to counter the bail plea of the accused, so as to make him able to participate in trial facing and ensuring his presence therein as and when required.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the considered view that applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
Let the accused-applicant/Mukesh Kumar Yadav involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
(ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 6.8.2019 Asheesh