Court No. - 48
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37979 of 2019 Applicant :- Ameen Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sarvesh Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Pritinker Diwaker,J.
Heard Sri Sarvesh Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Tripurari Pal, learned counsel for the objector and Sri Amit Sinha learned AGA for the State.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant, seeking enlargement on bail during the trial in connection with Crime No.148 of 2019 under Sections 376, 507 of IPC and 66 of IT Act, Police Station Quarsi, District Aligarh.
As per prosecution case, on 26.2.2019, FIR was lodged by the prosecutrix, alleging in it that in the year 2008, she met the applicant and at his instance, she developed friendship with him. For the first time, she also had physical relation with the applicant in the year 2008 and thereafter, in year 2010, the applicant again met her and started blackmailing her.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that a very improbable story has been put forth by the prosecutrix. He submits that there is inordinate delay in lodging the FIR and if the prosecutrix was subjected to physical relation against her wishes in the year 2008, she could have lodged a complaint immediately. He further submits that it is the prosecutrix who is blackmailing the applicant and that is why, report has been lodged.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the objector oppose the application for bail.
Considering the nature of allegations levelled against the applicant and the evidence available on record, without further commenting on merit, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail.
Let applicant Ameen be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty Thousand) and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he/she shall not seek any adjournment on the date fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.
(ii) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his/her counsel. In case of his/her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him/her under section 229-a I.P.C.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his/her presence proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him/her, in accordance with law, under section 174-a I.P.C.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) recording of statement under section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court absence of the applicant is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of bail and proceed against him/her in accordance with law.
(v) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial within a period of one year after the release of the applicant.
However, it is made clear that any willful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his/her bail so granted by this court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.
Order Date :- 25.9.2019 RKK/-