Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29786 of 2019 Applicant :- Jitendra @ Tiger Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pooja Chaudhary Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Vakalatnama filed by Sri Ved Ratan, Advocate on behalf of opposite party no.2 today in the Court is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no.193 of 2018, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C and Section 3/4 POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Sasani Gate, District-Aligarh is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
Submission made by learned counsel for the applicant is that the FIR was got registered by the mother of the prosecutrix under Sections 363 and 366 IPC against unknown persons. The girl was disappeared on 26.03.2018 and was eventually recovered after four months of the incident i.e. on 21.07.2018. As per the FIR, the age of the girl is 14 years but as per medical examination, her age comes around 16 years. As per 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. statements, it is clearly indicative of the fact that the prosecutrix was in consensual relationship with the applicant. She, on her own, went to Haryana and then Indore with the applicant without any resistance or alarm. The applicant is in jail since 22.07.2018, having no criminal antecedents to his credit.
Learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Keeping in view the relationship of the applicant with the deceased, nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and seeing the nature of injury, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant-Jitendra @ Tiger, involved in case crime no.193 of 2018, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C and Section 3/4 POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(5) of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Sasani Gate, District-Aligarh be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties 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 SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT SHE 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 HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HER 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 HER, 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 HER 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.
However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on her bail so granted by this court.
Order Date :- 25.7.2019/Sumit S