Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29220 of 2021 Applicant :- Chandrashekhar @ Prahlad Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Dharam Veer Singh,Imran Ullah Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manoj Kumar
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Heard Sri Imran Ullah, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Manoj Kumar, learned counsel for the first informant and Sri Akhilesh Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the State and perused the material on record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant-Chandrashekhar @ Prahlad, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 31 of 2021, under Section 313, 376, 120-B, 506 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Khair Garh, District Firozabad.
The prosecution case as per FIR lodged by the prosecutrix herself on 28.03.2021 under Sections 313, 120-B, 506 IPC against the applicant, Pramod and Narayan Baghel stating that she was having love affair with the applicant due to which her father got her married. After her marriage, the applicant started blackmailing her and on the showing of obscene photographs of the first informant to her husband and her in-laws, she was thrown out of her matrimonial house and then she came back to her maternal house and started living after which the applicant allured her and made promise to live with her throughout the life and also got her divorced from her husband and they started living together for about a year. Physical relationship was also established between them. The first informant became pregnant and on the pretext of providing her juice, the applicant mixed some medicines in it due to which she became seriously ill and aborted the pregnancy but had to be taken to the hospital for the complete process and after that the applicant left her and ran away. She went to the police to give an information about the incident on which the police to the contrary threatened her and asked her as to where she has concealed the applicant. She states that the applicant still loves her and is living at railway station Shikohabad at the place of Kaushlendra master which she has come to know, thus the FIR has been registered.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further argued that the prosecutrix in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. stated that she was in love with the applicant since the last eight years and she is aged about 23 years. The applicant has duped her and made false promise and kept her and exploited her. It is argued that the prosecutrix has filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. against her husband Ketan on 24.07.2019 which is still pending disposal. She had also filed a case for divorce which has been dismissed for non-prosecution vide order dated 3.2.2021 passed by the Addl. Family Judge, Family Court No.2, Firozabad. The prosecutrix/first informant is a major lady who is also married and living with the applicant out of her own sweet-will. It is a case of false implication. The relationship between the applicant and the prosecutrix was consensual relationship. Section 376 IPC has been added during investigation. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 42 of the affidavit. The applicant is in jail since 15.06.2021.
Per contra learned counsel for the first informant and learned counsel for the State vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant was instrumental in getting the fetus aborted of the prosecutrix. The applicant made false promises and misrepresented the prosecutrix and had indulged in an unfair relationship with the prosecutrix. Due to the act of the applicant, the prosecutrix was thrown out of her matrimonial house as he had shown some obscene photographs of the prosecutrix to her husband and in-laws after which they had sent her back to her maternal house, as such the prayer for bail be rejected.
After hearing the counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is apparent that the prosecutrix is a major girl. She states to have had love affair with the applicant since the last about eight years. She was living with the applicant since the last one year after being separated from her husband. There was physical relationship between them by consent.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
Let the applicant-Chandrashekhar @ Prahlad, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties (one of the sureties will be of family members) 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 will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.
ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) 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.
(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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 I.P.C.
(v) 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A IPC.
(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
The bail application is allowed.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
(Samit Gopal, J.) Order Date :- 30.9.2021 Gaurav