Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21502 of 2018 Applicant :- Jayhind Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Yadav,Babu Ram Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Counter affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Heard Sri Babu Ram Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pankaj Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant – Jayhind with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.961 of 2017, under Section 376 I.P.C., Police Station Saraikhwaza, District Jaunpur.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the FIR has been lodged against three named and few unknown persons with the allegation that the victim was sexually assaulted by the accused persons. In her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. the victim has narrated the whole story as to how the applicant alongwith others have sexually assaulted her. It is argued that the other co-accused persons have already been exonerated and charge sheet has come only against the applicant. It is next argued that in the statement of her (victim) husband, it is said that his wife was having illicit relationship with the applicant Jayhind and a false story has been build up because the applicant was seen alongwith victim by the husband, who raised objection to the same. The victim is a married lady. Learned counsel for the applicant also pressed the bail application on the ground of long detention as the applicant is in jail since 25.01.2018. It is next contended that the applicant has no criminal history and there is no possibility of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. Accordingly, he requests for bail.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, let the applicant involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity.
(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
(iv) The applicant shall regularly appear on the dates fixed by the trial court unless his personal attendance is exempted by the trial court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, it will be open to the opposite parties to approach the Court for cancellation of bail.
However, the trial court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same within six months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Alakh Alok Srivastava Vs. Union of India & Another reported in AIR 2018 (SC) 2004, if there is no legal impediment.
Order Date :- 26.4.2019 Anand Sri./-