Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 626 (ALL)

Ramu v. State Of U. P.

2021-07-06

ALOK MATHUR

body2021
JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Sri Surya Narayan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P. as well as Sri Ajeet Kumar Singh, learned counsel for private respondent through video conferencing in view of COVID-19 pandemic. 2. The present bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant seeking bail in pursuance to the Case Crime No. 20/2021, U/s – 354 & 9/10 POCSO Act, P.S. Thangaon, District – Sitapur. 3. It has been submitted that the F.I.R. was lodged by the mother of the prosecutrix stating that she had gone to her sister’s house where her minor daughter (prosecutirx) had gone to get certain medicines and it is alleged that the accused who was working in the nearby hospital had sexually assaulted the prosecutirx. 4. During investigation, the statement of the prosecutirx was recorded wherein she had clearly stated that the applicant did not do anything wrong with her and she has only narrated the string of incident from leaving the house of his mausi. She has only stated that the applicant under garb of giving money had caught hold by the prosecutrix and nothing else. 5. The statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has stated that when she felt down the applicant then assisted her in getting up and in fact she got scared and shouted but clarified that the applicant had not sexually assaulted her. 6. Sri Ajeet Kumar Singh, learned counsel for private respondent clearly submitted that these are the two statements of the prosecutrix and a bare reading of these two statements clearly does not disclose any offence under Section 354 I.P.C. or any offence under Section 9/10 POCSO Act. 7. Learned A.G.A. has, however, opposed the prayer for grant of bail but he has not disputed the above contention made by the learned counsel for the accused-applicant specially the statements of the prosecutrix under Section 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. where she had not supported the case of the prosecution and in fact has clearly stated that the applicant had not sexually molested or assaulted her and also the fact that he is in jail since 15.01.2021. 5. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail. 6. Let applicant-Ramu be released on bail in Case Crime No. 20/2021, U/s – 354 & 9/10 POCSO Act, P.S. Thangaon, District – Sitapur on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions :- (i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law. (ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code. (iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. 7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and proceed against the applicant in accordance with law. 8. The application stands disposed of. 9. 7. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the Court below shall be at liberty to cancel the bail and proceed against the applicant in accordance with law. 8. The application stands disposed of. 9. The party shall file computer generated copy of order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by him alongwith a self attested identity proof of the said person(s) (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number(s) to which the said Aadhar Card is linked before the concerned Court/Authority/Official. 10. The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of the computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.