Amit v. State of U.P

Court No. - 44 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 46061 of 2023 Applicant :- Amit Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Alok Kumar Pandey,Kuvar Akhilesh Singh,Susheel Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.

¶2The FIR in question was lodged as a missing person report. Subsequently, in the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., the victim stated that she had gone alongwith the applicant to Rajkot and then to Morbi. In the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she had stated that she knew the applicant for the last 4 to 5 months and had gone out of her own freewill and thereafter, they went to Hathras, thereafter to Jhansi and thereafter to Ahmedabad. The applicant has no criminal antecedent.

¶3Learned AGA has opposed the bail application.

¶4Considering the nature of the statements, prima-facie, the offence is not corroborated; the applicant has no criminal antecedent and is in custody since

02.08.2023, as such, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail. In view thereof, the application is allowed.

¶5Let the applicant Amit be released on bail in FIR No.86 of 2023, under Section 363, 366 IPC, P.S. Chandapa, District Hathras on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of court concerned with the following conditions:

(a) The applicant shall execute a bond to undertake to attend the hearings;

(b) The applicant shall not commit any offence similar to the offence of which he is accused or suspected of the commission; and

(c) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence. Order Date :- 1.11.2023 nishant High Court of Judicature at Allahabad