Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

2024 DIGILAW 85 (SC)

Shiv Kumar Saroj v. State of Uttar Pradesh

2024-01-22

DIPANKAR DATTA, SANJIV KHANNA

body2024
ORDER : 1. Leave granted. 2. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant-Shiv Kumar Saroj, respondent no. 1- State of Uttar Pradesh and respondent no. 2 the informant and the victim. 3. The appellant-Shiv Kumar Saroj is facing prosecution in the charge-sheet arising out of First Information Report 1 [for short “FIR”] No. 98 dated 05.03.2022 registered with Police Station Mau Aima, District Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh, for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 504, 506 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 2 [for short “IPC”] and Sections 3 and 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 3 [for short “POCSO Act”] Offences under Section 376 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the POCSO Act were added in the charge-sheet. 4. The appellant-Shiv Kumar Saroj is about twenty years of age, and has been in custody/incarceration since 13.07.2022. 5. The appellant-Shiv Kumar Saroj has relied upon the statement of the prosecutrix as recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 4 [for short “Cr.P.C.”] by the Police Authorities and under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C. by the Magistrate. 6. On the question of the date of birth, the prosecution has relied upon the transfer certificate, but it is also a fact that the ossification report states that the prosecutrix is about 18 years of age. 7. Taking an overall view of the facts and circumstances of the case, and without commenting on the merits, we feel that the appellant-Shiv Kumar Saroj should be released on bail during the pendency of the trial, subject to and on the terms and conditions to be fixed by the trial court. 8. In addition, the appellant-Shiv Kumar Saroj shall comply with the conditions prescribed in Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. The impugned judgment/order is set aside and the appeal is allowed in the aforesaid terms. 9. We clarify that the observations made in the present order for the grant of bail are for the disposal of the present appeal and will not be treated as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case. The trial court will decide the matter in accordance with law 10. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.