Court No. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 50378 of 2019 Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Maurya Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shivam Yadav,Anil Kumar Yadav, Jitendra Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajai Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Sri Shivam Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ashwani Prakash Tripathi, learned AGA for the State are present. Sri Pradeep Singh Sengar and Sri Ajai Kumar Singh, learned counsels for the opposite party no. 2 are not present even when the matter has been taken up in the revised list.
Heard learned counsels for the parties present and perused the material on record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Manoj Kumar Maurya, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 369 of 2019, under Sections 354gha, 504, 506, 507, 294, 354kha, 354ga, 376 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, registered at P.S. Maduadeeh, District Varanasi.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the allegation of rape is conspicuously missing in the F.I.R. which is only confined to the fact of outraging the modesty of Gargi Sharma by the applicant only. It is argued that with ulterior motive the story regarding committing physical relationship with the two girls has been subsequently added by the prosecution in order to falsely implicate the applicant. It is further argued that as per the F.I.R. Gargi Sharma is aged about 17 years who has stated her age to be 18 years in the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and Mansi Sharma has stated her age to be 21 years in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and as such both were adults. Learned counsel further argued that in the statement of both the victims there is no specification about the date and time of the alleged rape being committed on them and same has been stated in a very vague manner. The applicant has no other criminal antecedents as stated in para-17 of the affidavit and is in jail since 11.09.2019.
It is argued that in the F.I.R. though there is allegation that even prior to the present incident there was a report registered against the applicant for his illegal acts for which a report was got registered by the first informant himself, but in the said case the trial was done as Case No. 128 of 2013, Case Crime No. 274 of 2012, under Sections 376, 511, 506 I.P.C., P.S. - Maduadeeh, District Varranasi, by the Juvenile Justice Board, Varanasi and the applicant was acquitted of the charges levelled against him vide judgement and order dated 27.11.2017, copy of which is annexed as annexure no. 2 to the affidavit. Learned counsel for the applicant further argued that in the said case the victim, who was examined as P.W.-2 in the trial, had stated that no such incident had occurred and further the first informant was examined as P.W.-1, who had stated that he had got the said case registered on hear say basis. It is argued that there was even an attempt to falsely implicate the applicant previously which failed and as such subsequently the present F.I.R. has been lodged just to harass him.
Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail and has argued that there is allegation against the applicant for outraging the modesty of Gargi Sharma as per F.I.R. and subsequently, in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and her sister Mansi Sharma in her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. there is allegation of rape committed on them by the applicant.
After perusing the record in the light of the submissions made at the bar and after taking an overall view of all 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- Manoj Kumar Maurya, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number 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 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 :- 6.1.2021/Naresh