Allahabad High Court
Sonu Chaudhary And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 2 November, 2020
Author: Vivek Kumar Singh
Bench: Vivek Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 85 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 31204 of 2020 Applicant :- Sonu Chaudhary And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Pandey,Ajay Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA-I, for the State and perused the material brought on record.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated due to ulterior motive. It is next submitted that the main role of offence in the present case has been assigned to co-accused Ajeet Chaudhary. It is next submitted that there is no credential evidence against the applicants which may show involvement of the applicants in the present case. There is no independent reliable eye witness of the alleged incident. It is next submitted that there is various contradictions in the version of F.I.R. as well as statement recorded under section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. Further submission is that applicants who are in jail since 20.6.2020, have no previous criminal history and there is also no possibility of his either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. Applicants also undertakes that they will not misuse the liberty, if granted.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant.
Considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and large mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.
Let applicants- Sonu Chaudhary and Kishan Chaudhary, who are involved in Case Crime No. 137 of 2020, under section- 354 IPC, and Section 7/8 of POCSO Act and 3 (1) Da, 3(1) Dha, SC/ST Act, Police Station - Karanda, District- Ghazipur, be released on bail, on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. The applicants will attend and co-operate the trial proceedings pending before the court concerned on the date fixed after release.
2. They will not tamper with the witnesses.
3. They will not indulge in any illegal activities during the bail period.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicants to prison.
The trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same as expeditiously as possible, keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Alakh Alok Srivastava v. Union of India and others reported in AIR 2018 SC 2440, if there is no legal impediment.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad. The concerned Court shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court, Allahabad.
Order Date :- 2.11.2020 ssm