Allahabad High Court
Junaid vs State Of U.P. And Another on 24 September, 2019
Author: Vivek Kumar Singh
Bench: Vivek Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36944 of 2019 Applicant :- Junaid Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Aditya Prasad Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Vakalatnama filed by Sri Ved Prakash Mishra, learned counsel on behalf of complainant today in the Court is taken on record.
Heard Sri Aditya Prasad Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ved Prakah Mishra, learned counsel for the complainant and Sri Abhinav Prasad, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn the attention of this Court towards annexure-4 to the affidavit accompanying this bail application, which is the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. wherein it has been stated by the victim that she is major aged about 19 years and no rape has been committed on her by the applicant, she don't know how this case has been lodged by her father .Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 20.7.2019. It has been pointed out that the applicant has no criminal history.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has no objection to the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the applicant however he as well as Learned A.G.A. have opposed the prayer for bail.
Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any view on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.
Let the applicant Junaid involved in Case Crime No.403 of 2019, under Sections 363, 376, 506, 511 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station Jani, District Meerut be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions.
1. The applicant will continue to attend and co-operate in the trial pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.
2. He will not tamper with the witnesses.
3. He will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.
It is further directed that the identity, status and residence proof of the sureties be verified by the authorities concerned before they are accepted.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the trial court will be at liberty to cancel the bail.
Order Date :- 24.9.2019 Dev/-