Anil v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38165 of 2023 Applicant :- Anil Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Brajesh Kumar Solanki,Pranjal Kesarwani Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Supplementary affidavit, filed by the counsel for the applicant, is taken on record.

¶2Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶3The instant bail application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C., has been filed with a prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 610 of 2022, under Section 377 I.P.C., and 67 Information of Technology Act, Police Station-Khatauli, District-Muzaffarnagar during pendency of the trial.

¶4Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case. The applicant did not act inappropriately with the victim. As per the medical report no external injury was seen around the anus. The medical version does not support the prosecution case. The investigating officer has not collected any indecent video of the victim. It is next contended that the co-accused Kuldeep has been granted bail by this Court vide order dated 28.3.2023 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 12817 of 2023. The applicant claims parity. The criminal history of the applicant has been explained in para 3 of the supplementary affidavit. The applicant is in jail since

9.12.2022. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶5Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶6Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that the medical report does not support the prosecution version. The investigating officer has not collected any indecent video of the victim. Further, the co-accused Kuldeep has been granted bail by this Court. The applicant has presently remained confined for more than ten months and there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, more so when no reasonable apprehension has been brought to the fore by the State that the applicant, if enlarged on bail, would either tamper with the evidence or intimidate the witness, without commenting on the merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶7Let the applicant, Anil involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that: i. the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶8In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court. Order Date :- 17.10.2023 S.S. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad