Court No. - 42
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 39029 of 2019 Applicant :- Imtiyaz Ahmad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, the learned A.G.A. for the State; Sri Araf Khan for the informant; and perused the record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case crime No. 561 of 2019, under Sections 420, 506, 376 I.P.C., police station Quarshi, District- Aligarh with the prayer to enlarge him on bail.
The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the first information report, which has been lodged by the victim herself, alleges that the victim and the applicant had physical relationship for the last four years; and that 27.04.2019 was fixed as the date for marriage but, on 23.07.2019, the applicant sent a message (SMS) that he would not marry the informant. It has been alleged that, thereafter,when effort was made to trace out the applicant, the applicant was not traceable and the family members of the applicant also misbehaved with the informant.
The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that from the allegations made a case for an offence punishable under Section 376 I.P.C. is not made out nor an offence punishable under Section 420 I.P.C. is made out as it is a case where the parties had been in a relationship spread over four years. It has been submitted that the applicant is innocent; he has been falsely implicated; he has no previous criminal history; he is in jail since 23.07.2019 and, in case he is enlarged on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the informant have opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and have submitted that as per law offence punishable under Sections 376 and 420 I.P.C. would be made out.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions noticed above, without commenting upon merits of the case, I am of the opinion that the applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
Let applicant Imtiyaz Ahmad 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 not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses;
(ii) 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;
(iii) 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;
(iv) 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; and
(v) 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 :- 25.9.2019 Sunil Kr Tiwari