Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
  4. /
  5. 2019
  6. /
  7. January

Pramod Yadav vs State Of U P

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad|28 February, 2019
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3476 of 2019 Applicant :- Pramod Yadav Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ratnesh Kumar Jaiswal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Shri Shyam Babu Vaish holding brief of Shri Ratnesh Kumar Jaiswal, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Sheetal Prasad Chakravarthy, learned counsel for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant - Pramod Yadav with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.167 of 2018, under Sections 376-D, 328 I.P.C., Police Station Kachawan, District Mirzapur.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the FIR has been lodged by the father of victim stating therein that the applicant alongwith one Sunil has committed sexual assault upon the victim after making her unconscious. At the time of incident the victim was at her nana's home. She told the entire incident to her parents. It is next argued that FIR has been lodged after an inordinate delay of 12 days. According to medico legal examination report of the victim, no sign of rape has been found on her body. The date of birth of the victim is 8.7.1999 and as per medical report, the age of the victim is 21 years. It is argued that victim was having love affection with Pramod Yadav and they wanted to marry but when the co- accused Sunil, who was fully aware of the victim, had disclosed the fact to the applicant, the applicant refused to marry her, therefore, the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case. It is also contended that there are variations in the statement of the victim recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. 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. The applicant is languishing in jail since 16.06.2018.
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 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.
Order Date :- 28.2.2019 Anand Sri./-
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Pramod Yadav vs State Of U P

Court

High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad

JudgmentDate
28 February, 2019
Judges
  • S Manju Rani Chauhan
Advocates
  • Ratnesh Kumar Jaiswal