Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in Case Crime No.166 of 2017, under Sections 363, 366, 504, 376 I.P.C. & Section 3/4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station - Manikpur, District - Pratapgarh.
The F.I.R. in this case was lodged on the basis of an application moved under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. It is stated that on 25.07.2017 the applicant had allured the prosecutrix and taken her away. The application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was moved on 9.8.2017, whereas the F.I.R. was lodged on 8.9.2017. It is stated that when the prosecutrix was recovered, her statement under Section 161Cr.P.C. was recorded, wherein, she has stated that she had gone with the applicant with her own free will. They were in love affair and they were willing to marry each other, but the family members were not ready, due to which on 29.09.2017, the applicant took her Deoria and they remained there for 3-4 months. In her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. also she had given statement in favour of the applicant. As per medical report, her age was above 18 years.
However, opposing the bail, learned A.G.A. has stated that as per High School Certificate, her date of birth is 9.4.2002, so on the date of occurrence, she was minor. There is a contradiction of age in the medical report and the High School Certificate, which can be verified only at the time of trial.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.
Let applicant (Arjun Saroj @ Bihari) be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(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. is issued and the 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 of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) 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.
Order Date :- 28.8.2019 S. Kumar