Nandu v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 44474 of 2023 Applicant :- Nandu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Jatan Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Learned AGA submits that notice of the instant application has been served on the opposite party no.3-Child Welfare Committee and opposite party no.4-informant on 17.10.2023. However, when the case is taken up no one appears on their behalf nor any counter affidavit has been filed. Receiving endorsements produced by learned AGA, are taken on record.

¶2Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri V.P.Tripathi, learned AGA for the State-respondent.

¶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. 308 of 2022, under Section 377 IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Gandhi Park, District Aligarh, during the pendency of trial.

¶4Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case owing to other dispute between the parties. The applicant did not act inappropriately with the victim. As per the medical report, no external or internal injury was seen, only redness was present around the anal area. At present, there is no cogent evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The trial is moving at a snail's pace and shows no sign of early conclusion. Charges have not been framed till date. The applicant is in jail since 07.07.2022 having no criminal history and in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶5Learned AGA 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 at this stage there is no substantive evidence against the applicant. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant has remained confined for more than one year and four 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 delay the trial 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 Nandu, 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 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; 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 :- 17.11.2023 Lbm/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad