Mool Chandra v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36488 of 2023 Applicant :- Mool Chandra Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- S.S. Rajput Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Learned A.G.A. on the basis of instructions submits that notice of the instant bail application has been served upon the opposite party no. 2-informant on 05.08.2023 as well as upon the opposite party no. 4-Child Welfare Committee, Aligarh on 07.08.2023. The receiving endorsements as produced by learned A.G.A. are taken on record. However, when the case is taken up, no one appears on behalf of the opposite party nos. 2 and 4 nor any counter affidavit has been filed on their behalf.

¶2Heard learned 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 Case Crime No. 82 of 2023, under Sections 457, 354 I.P.C. and 7/8 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station Vijaygarh, District Aligarh during the pendency of the trial.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is brother-in-law of the informant and on account of the land dispute between the parties the applicant has been falsely implicated. The applicant did not act inappropriately with the victim. Vague and general allegations have been levelled against the applicant. There are inconsistencies in the first information report and statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on one hand and the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. on the other. In the statements of the victims under Section 164 Cr.P.C. one of the victim did not level any allegation against the applicant, whereas the other victim stated that an unknown person acted indecently with her. The said inconsistencies discredit the prosecution case. The applicant is in jail since 07.07.2023 having no criminal history and if he is released 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 learned counsel for the parties and after perusal of the record, this Court prima facie finds that vague and general allegations have been levelled against the applicant. In their statements under Section 164 Cr.P.C. the victims did not level any allegation against the applicant. There are inconsistencies in the first information report as well as statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on one hand and the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. on the other. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for almost three and half months and after submission of the charge-sheet there is no hope of early conclusion of trial, and 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, therefore, 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-Mool Chandra, involved in the aforesaid case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of 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; and,

(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 :- 30.10.2023 SKT/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad