ANIL Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Prashant Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

(2.) This is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant Anil with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.28 of 2018, under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C. and 7/8 of POCSO Act, Police Station Churkhi, District Jalaun, during pendency of trial. The first bail application was rejected by this Court on 09.04.2019.

(3.) In the affidavit accompanying the present bail application, it has been stated that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. It is next stated that as per allegations made in the first information report lodged by Sanjay Singh on 2nd July, 2018 at 17:38 hours, on 16th June, 2018 at 5:00 a.m. (morning), his niece, who were staying at her maternal uncle's place for study, went for nature's call but she did not return. The first informant and other family members made every effort to search her but she could not be traced out because of which the first information report has been lodged. In the statements of the first informant (maternal uncle of the victim), his wife (maternal aunt of the victim) and his mother (maternal grand-mother of the victim) recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 2nd July, 2018, the version of the first information report has been reiterated. However, on 23rd September, 2018, an application has been made by the first informant to the concerned Station House Officer stating therein that during search of the victim, he came to know that the victim was enticed away by Pramod in collusion with his father Shyam Baboo, mother Shivkanti and his younger brother Anil (applicant herein). In restatement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on the same date i.e. 23rd September, 2018, the first informant has reiterated the same as unfolded in his application dated 23rd September, 2018. In the statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. the father of the victim has stated the fact regarding missing of the victim, he made every effort to search the victim and during search he came to know that the victim was kidnapped by Pramod in collusion with his father, mother, younger brother, one Golu Pal and his relatives. In the statements of the independent witness namely, Pradeep Yadav recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 2nd December, 2018, it has been stated that he saw that on 16th June, 2018 at 5:00 a.m. the victim was enticed away by Pramod in the presence of his father, mother and younger brother by a tempo, which was being driven by nephew of Raja Bhaiya Pal, namely Golu. Two other independent witnesses, namely, Ram Kumar and Shyam Sundar in their statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. have also reiterated the same version as stated by another independent witness, namely, Pradeep Yadav. It is next stated that co-accused Shyam Baboo Yadav, having identical role, has been enlarged on bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 28.11.2019 passed in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No.52610 of 2019. Accordingly, the applicant is also entitled for bail on the ground of parity. It is next contended that the applicant has no criminal history and there is no possibility of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, he is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and he is languishing in jail since 24.12.2018. Accordingly, he requests for bail.