Kinnar Kasim Alias Rukhsar v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43048 of 2023 Applicant :- Kinnar Kasim Alias Rukhsar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Rai Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Learned A.G.A. submits that notice of the instant application has been served on the opposite party no. 4/C.W.C. on 20.06.2023 and opposite party no. 2/informant on 09.10.2023. The relevant endorsements have been produced by the learned A.G.A. The same are taken on record. However, when the case is called out, none appears on behalf of the said opposite parties nor any counter affidavit has been filed on their behalf.

¶2Heard counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party.

¶3The instant bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to enlarge the applicant on bail in S.C. No. 1600 of 2023, Case Crime No. 119 of 2023 under Sections 363, 365, 366A & 120B of I.P.C., and Section 16/17 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station-Badhapur, District-Bijnor, during the pendency of the trial.

¶4Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant was not named in the first information report and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Even in the statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C., there are no allegations against the applicant. The case of the applicant is clearly distinguishable from that of the co-accused, Sameer @ Sanu. The applicant is in jail since 07.06.2023, having no criminal history. 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 applicant was not named in the first information report. At present, there is no substantive evidence against the applicant. Further, the applicant has no criminal antecedents and has remained confined for more than four months and after submission of the charge-sheet 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 delay the trial or intimidate the witness, without commenting on merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶7Let the applicant-Kinnar Kasim Alias Rukhsar, involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the conditions that he:

(i) shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court;

(ii) shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence;

(iii) shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.

¶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 :- 28.10.2023 Sachin Mishra High Court of Judicature at Allahabad