Allahabad High Court
Amir vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 28 February, 2023
Author: Krishan Pahal
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 83 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 7443 of 2023 Applicant :- Amir Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- M.P.S. Chauhan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashok Kumar Singh Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
1. List has been revised.
2. Heard Shri M.P.S. Chauhan, learned counsel for applicant and Shri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant as well as Shri V.K.S. Parmar, learned A.G.A. for the State.
3. The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.127 of 2021, under Sections 363, 366, 376AB IPC and 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Chandaus, District Aligarh with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
4. As per prosecution story, the applicant is stated to have enticed away the minor daughter of the informant on the pretext of giving her some money on 12.07.2021 at about 2:00 PM.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that he has been falsely implicated in the present case. Initially, the FIR was instituted under Section 363 IPC and later on the charge-sheet was submitted under Sections 363 and 354 IPC, but at the stage of trial, the Trial Judge has framed charge in the added Sections of 366, 376AB IPC & 5/6 POCSO Act. Learned counsel has further stated that no offence under Section 363 IPC is made out and there is no allegation of rape against the applicant. Learned counsel has further stated that four witnesses of fact have been examined and they have not supported the prosecution story. There is no likelihood of conviction of the applicant in the present matter. The victim has not been medically examined. There is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is in jail since 16.07.2021.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the bail application but has not disputed the facts that the witnesses have turned hostile and there is no evidence on record against the applicant.
7. Learned A.G.A. has also vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that the examination-in-chief of all the witnesses is contested one and the witnesses have deposed against the applicant and even an independent witness Sarafat has also reiterated the allegations levelled in the FIR. Learned A.G.A. has further stated that the victim, in her examination-in-chief, has categorically stated that the applicant has fondled with her and even has committed the offence as defined under Section 5/6 POCSO Act. Learned A.G.A. has further stated that the examination-in-chief of the victim was recorded on 22.06.2022 and she has categorically stated that her statement is correct and she has supported the prosecution story that on 04.11.2022, remaining examination-in-chief and cross-examination of the victim was taken up and she has not supported the prosecution story during her cross-examination. Learned A.G.A. has further stated that the ensuing period of four and half months has proven fatal to the prosecution story. It is settled law that the statement of the witnesses has not be considered in bits and pieces but the part which finds support by the other evidence may be taken into consideration at the time of judgment as such, the applicant is not entitled for bail as the victim was a tender girl of eight years of age.
8. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the evidence on record, and also taking into consideration the age of the victim and the fact that the she has supported the prosecution story during her examination-in-chief recorded on 22.06.2022, I do not find it a fit case for grant of bail to the applicant.
9. The bail application is found devoid of merits and is, accordingly, rejected.
10. However, it is directed that the aforesaid case pending before the trial court be decided expeditiously, preferably within a period of one year from the date of production of a certified copy of this order or as early as possible in view of the principle as has been laid down in the recent judgements of the Apex Court in the cases of Vinod Kumar Vs. State of Punjab; 2015 (3) SCC 220 and Hussain and Another vs. Union of India; (2017) 5 SCC 702, if there is no legal impediment.
11. 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 :- 28.2.2023 Ravi Kant