Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 9, Cited by 0]

Allahabad High Court

Pawan vs State Of U.P. on 4 December, 2019

Author: Siddharth

Bench: Siddharth





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 72
 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41446 of 2019
 
Applicant :- Pawan
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Ambrish Kumar Kashyap,Jitendra Kumar Misra
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
 

As per office report dated 30.11.2019 notice has been served on opposite party no.2. No one appears on behalf of the informant.

Heard Shri J.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.

The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Pawan with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 832 of 2018, under Sections 363, 366, 376, 506 IPC, and section 3/4 POCSO Act Police Station Kotwali Fatehgerh, District- Farrukhabad, during pendency of trial.

Submission is that age of the victim, as per medical report, is 16-18 years.From her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. it appears that she wanted to marry applicant ,therefore she went to Lucknow and then Allahabad.After consultation with lawyer she was told that she is minor therefore marriage could not be solemnized.From the medico legal report doctor has not found any sign of rape of force against her. However he has not ruled out forceful penetration. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit and he is languishing in jail since 8.3.2019, In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.

Per contra learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant and submitted that as per school transfer certificate victim is aged about thirteen years six months. She is minor at the time of incident. There is no question of consent. Therefore, he is not entitled to be enlarged on bail.

After hearing rival contentions, this Court finds that there is considerable difference of age in the medical report and school transfer certificate of the victim. The question whether the certificate of school transfer certificate of the victim produced before this Court is genuine and the date of birth mentioned is also correct or incorrect cannot be determined at this stage. The medical report clearly proves that victim is 16-18 years of age and therefore, her age of consent can be presumed. The Apex Court in the case of Smt. Indra @ Suhani Vs. State of U.P. and others, (2013) 6 ADJ 195 (Habeas Corpus Writ Petition No. 24814 of 2013), has disproved the rejection of prayer of the victim for release from Nari Niketan on the ground that from school record, her age has been found to be below the age of consent, but in the medical report, her age was found to be above 18 years and therefore, the Apex Court allowed the victim to go with her alleged husband. Even otherwise at this stage, this issue cannot be decided by this Court and shall be decided by the trial court during the trial.

Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of 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, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-

1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
3. 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.

Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.

Order Date :- 4.12.2019 Atul kr. sri.