Allahabad High Court
Munish Kumar Saxena vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 5 May, 2023
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11447 of 2023 Applicant :- Munish Kumar Saxena Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rajendra Prasad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.
1. As per office report dated 12.04.2023 notice has been served upon opposite party no.4 i.e. informant. Despite service of notice, none appeared on behalf of the informant.
2. Heard Sri Vinod Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Rajendra Prasad, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Suresh Bahadur Singh, learned AGA for the State.
3. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 372 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366 and 376 IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Mughalsarai, District Chandauli during pendency of the trial.
4. FIR of the present case was lodged against Sonu Maurya (non applicant) and according to the FIR on 04.11.2022 nominated accused Sonu Maurya has enticed away the minor daughter of the informant aged about 16 years and it is further mentioned in the FIR that earlier also Sonu had enticed away the daughter of the informant.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant was not named in the FIR but after about a week when victim herself returned back to her home and her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded then she disclosed the name of applicant and stated that she was in continuous touch with applicant for one year on instagram and on 04.11.2022 she arrived at railway station Varanasi from where she went along with applicant at Rampur Moradabad and on 07.11.2022 she performed marriage with the applicant. He further submits that similar statement has been given by the victim in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and according to educational certificate her age is 16 years but X-ray report shows that her age is between 16-19 years and, therefore, it appears that she is aged about 18 years and both applicant and victim have performed marriage, therefore, considering this fact, applicant should be released on bail.
6. Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that according to educational certificate victim is hardly 16 years old girl but could not dispute the fact hat her radiological age is around 16-19 years and in her both the statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. she categorically stated that she had performed marriage with the applicant.
7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.
8. Although, as per educational certificate of the victim, she was around 16 years old girl but her radiological age varies between 16-19 years and in both the statements recorded under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. victim categorically stated that she according to her own wish had gone along with applicant and performed court marriage with him, therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
9. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.
10. Let the applicant - Munish Kumar Saxena be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.
(ii) 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 or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.
11. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.
12. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.
Order Date :- 5.5.2023 AK Pandey