Ravi Katheriya v. State of U.P

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50635 of 2023 Applicant :- Ravi Katheriya Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Narayan Singh(Kushwaha) Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Heard learned Counsel for the applicant, Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶2The 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. 395 of 2023, under Sections 377, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., and under Section 67 Information Technology Act, Police Station-Kotwali Dehat, District-Etah during pendency of the trial.

¶3Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the instant case owing to certain other dispute between the parties. The incident occurred on 23.8.2023 and the first information report was lodged on 29.8.2023. The delay in the facts of the present case is fatal to the prosecution case. As per the medical report and the statement of the doctor no internal or external injury was seen around the anal area. No indecent video was recovered by the investigating officer. The applicant did not act inappropriately with the victim. The applicant does not have any criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 30.8.2023. In case, he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶4Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail but could not satisfactorily dispute the aforesaid submissions from the record.

¶5Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the record, this Court prima facie finds that the first information report was lodged belatedly. The medical report does not support the prosecution version. No indecent video was recovered by the investigating officer. Further the applicant has no criminal antecedents. The applicant has presently remained confined for almost three 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 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.

¶6Let the applicant, Ravi Katheriya involved in the aforesaid case be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned on the following conditions that: i. the applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence; ii. the applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witness; iii. the applicant shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court.

¶7In 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 :- 28.11.2023 S.S. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad