Court No. - 83
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 36082 of 2021 Applicant :- Ankit Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anand Pati Tiwari
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 323 of 2021, under Sections 354, 506 IPC and 7/8 POCSO Act, at Police Station Dibiyapur, District Auraiya.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. It has further been submitted that the incident took place on 4.6.2021 and the FIR of the alleged incident has been lodged on 7.6.2021 after three days of the alleged incident. There is no satisfactory explanation of this delay in lodging the FIR. Three persons are named in the FIR. As per the FIR version, the applicant and other co-accused were drinking alcohol and started abusing and molesting the victims Deepika aged about 16 years and Deepa aged about 14 years. As per the medical report the injuries of victims are simple in nature. The statements of the victims recorded under sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C are contradictory. It has further been submitted that no weapon has been recovered from the possession of the applicant or on his pointing out. It has further been submitted that the applicant is a student of B.Sc. The applicant has no criminal history. Co-accused Lavlesh has already been granted bail by the court below. He has further submitted that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 9.6.2021.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. opposes the application for bail.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Ankit, who is involved in aforementioned case crime 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 following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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 counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his 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, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A IPC.
(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 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.
In case of breach of of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
Order Date :- 21.12.2021/A.