Allahabad High Court
Apit Kumar Mishra And Another vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 12 December, 2019
Author: Yashwant Varma
Bench: Yashwant Varma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 55188 of 2019 Applicant :- Apit Kumar Mishra And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar,Bakhteyar Yusuf Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Yogendra Mishra for the informantSri I.P. Srivastava, the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The instant application has been moved seeking anticipatory bail in light of the apprehension of the arrest of the applicants in Case Crime No. 860 of 2019, under Sections 363, 366, 506, 376, 120B IPC and Section 3/4 Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act 2012, police station Soraon, District Prayagraj.
The Court finds itself unable to countenance the prayer for anticipatory bail since it is admitted inter partes that the victim is a minor as per the High School Certificate. In view of the provisions made in Section 94 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, a medical report can be relied upon only in case a certificate of date of birth by the school or the Matriculation Certificate or the birth certificate issued by a municipal body is otherwise not available. Since admittedly the victim was studying in Class-XII and had passed the Matriculation examination and for which a certificate exists, the Court finds no ground to base the grant of relief on an alleged medical examination undertaken. Learned counsel has however placed reliance upon an order passed by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 4532 of 2018 arising out of SLP (C) No. 8001/2018. It becomes pertinent to note here that the aforesaid order refers to an earlier order of 23 April 2018 by which the victim was directed to be subjected to a medical examination. That order of 23 April 2018 is not on the record and consequently the Court is unable to verify the circumstances in which a direction was framed for the medical examination of that victim even though a certificate issued by the C.B.S.E. existed on the record. In any case and bearing in mind the unambiguous provisions made in Section 94 referred to above, the Court finds no ground to entertain this application which shall consequently stand rejected.
Order Date :- 12.12.2019 faraz