Ram Kalyan Lodh Alias Karela v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Court No. - 74 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48281 of 2023 Applicant :- Ram Kalyan Lodh Alias Karela Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashok Kumar Yadav Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.

¶1Learned A.G.A. submits that notice of the instant application has been served on the informant/opposite party no. 4 and on the opposite party no. 3/C.W.C. on 07.11.2023. The relevant endorsements have been produced by the learned A.G.A. The same are taken on record. However, when the case is called out, none appears on behalf of the opposite party no. 3/C.W.C. nor any counter affidavit has been filed on his behalf.

¶2Heard counsel for the applicant, Sri Ashok Kumar Yadav, counsel for the informant and Sri Neeraj Kumar Sharma, 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. 122 of 2023 under Section 363 & 366A of I.P.C. and Section 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station-Sardhuwa, District-Chitrakoot, during the pendency of the trial.

¶4Counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. The victim is a major girl. In her statements under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C., the victim stated that she left her house voluntarily and stayed with applicant. There is no allegation of any indecent behaviour and sexual assault against the applicant. The applicant is in jail since

23.09.2023, having no criminal history. In case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the said liberty.

¶5Learned A.G.A. and counsel for the informant have 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 the victim in her statements under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. stated that she left her house voluntarily and stayed with applicant. There is no allegation of any indecent behaviour and sexual assault against the applicant. Further, the applicant has no criminal antecedents and has remained confined for more than two months and after submission of the charge-sheet 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 merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

¶7Let the applicant-Ram Kalyan Lodh Alias Karela, involved in 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;

(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 :- 30.11.2023 Sachin Mishra High Court of Judicature at Allahabad