Sunil Kumar Seth v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 49261 of 2023 Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Seth Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Sri Anupam Anand, learned Brief Holder for the State, on the basis of instructions submits that notice of the instant bail application has been served upon the opposite party no. 4-informant and the opposite party no. 3-Child Welfare Committee, Azamgarh on 05.11.2023. The receiving endorsements as produced by learned Brief Holder are taken on record. However, when the case is taken up, no one appears on behalf of the opposite party nos. 3 and 4 nor any counter affidavit has been filed on their behalf.

¶2Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Brief Holder 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. 416 of 2023, under Sections 377 I.P.C. and 18 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Mehnagar, District Azamgarh during the pendency of the trial.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case owing to certain other disputes between the parties. The applicant did not act inappropriately with the victim. No medical examination of the victim was conducted. At present there is no cogent evidence to link the applicant with the offence. The applicant is in jail since

01.10.2023 having no criminal history and if he is released on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶5Learned Brief Holder 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 at this stage there is no substantive evidence against the applicant. No medical examination of the victim was got conducted by the police authorities. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Moreover, the applicant has remained confined for almost one and half month 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-Sunil Kumar Seth, 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 :- 20.11.2023 SKT/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad