Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 21365 of 2018 Applicant :- Manish Kumar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Mishra,Vinay Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Sanjay Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pankaj Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Manish Kumar with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 1508 of 2017, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C., and Section 8 POCSO Act, Police Station- Akbarpur, District-Kanpur Dehat, during pendency of trial.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that as per the allegations made in the F.I.R., on 12.12.2017, the daughter of the informant, namely, Arti Devi was taken away by the cousin of the informant's daughter-in-law, Manish. It is also alleged that she was persuaded by the brother of the informant's daughter-in-law, Vipin Kumar to go along with him. She had also taken along with her Rs. 50,000/- and some jewellery. After recovery of the victim, her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded in which she has stated that she was forcibly taken away by Vipin Kumar and Manish (applicant herein) to Delhi and was sexually assaulted by them, however, she herself has refused to get herself medically examined. As per medical report, she is aged about 18 years. It is further argued that the applicant being in relation of the daughter-in- law of the informant, has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the applicant has also pressed the issue of period of detention of the applicant i.e. 01.01.2018, who has undergone more than one year and six months of incarceration. He, therefore, submits that considering the larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of
U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 no useful purpose would be served in keeping the applicant behind the bars. The applicant does not have any previous criminal history. It is next contended that there is no possibility of the applicant 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.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and also perusing the material on record, 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 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.
The trial Court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same as expeditiously as possible 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 and another reported in AIR 2018 (SC) 2440, if there is no legal impediment.
Order Date :- 25.7.2019 JK Yadav