1. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent and perused records.
2. This is second bail application, moved by the accused/applicant for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 453 of 2019, under Sections 452, 493, 504, 506 and 376 IPC, relating to Police Station Kotwali Ayodhya, District Ayodhya.
3. Allegation in the First Information Report is that on 4.6.2019 at about 9 p.m., the applicant entered the house of the prosecutrix and committed rape upon her. It is also alleged that the applicant had beaten the prosecutrix.
4. Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the case due to enmity. He has committed no offence. He submits that the F.I.R. has been lodged which is counterblast of the earlier F.I.R. lodged by one Rekha Manjhi whose only son Shiva Manjha was missing, which was registered as Case Crime No.0363/2019 and in the said F.I.R., the complainant, her mother and her two relatives were accused under Sections 365 and 506 IPC in which case the applicant is the eye-witness. He further submitted that in the aforesaid case, the applicant is the only witness, who saw Shiva Manjha going with the complainant and her mother and one of his relatives Ganesh and on the basis of the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C., given by the applicant to the police, the complainant's mother and her relative Ganesh were arrested. He submits that statement of the applicant in the aforesaid case under Section 161 Cr.P.C. has also been mentioned in the bail rejection order dated 24.8.2019, passed by court below, which is annexed as Annexure-7. In view of the above, his submission is that the applicant has only been implicated by the complainant to exert pressure upon the applicant not to testify in the aforesaid criminal case, in which the applicant is the eye witness. He submits that the applicant is languishing in jail since 19.7.2019.
5. It is also submitted and there is no apprehension that the accused-applicant after release on bail, may flee from the process of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty, therefore, his submission is that the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
6. Learned A.G.A., however, on the other hand submits that the applicant is not entitled to be granted bail, but does not dispute the submission advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, looking to the period of custody of the applicant and, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
8. Let applicant Manoj Manjhi be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to 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.
9. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
10. Observations made herein-above are only for the purpose of disposal of this bail application and the same shall not have any bearing on the trial of the case.
Order Date :- 18.8.2021 Gautam