Court No. - 42
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23362 of 2019 Applicant :- Purushottam Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Phool Singh Yadav,Ajai Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Mr. Phool Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Prashant Kumar, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant- Purushottam with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case No. 2322 of 2018 registered as Case Crime No. 306 of 2017, under Sections 376-D I.P.C., Police Station-Kadarchowk, District- Budaun, during the pendency of the trial.
It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that earlier an F.I.R. was lodged on 27.07.2015 by Awadesh, who is elder brother of the applicant against the husband of the prosecutrix, namely, Mahaveer in which charge-sheet has been submitted on 12.08.2015 after which for an alleged incident dated 20.08.2015, an application under Section 156(3) was moved by the prosecutrix, requesting to get the F.I.R. lodged against the uncle of the applicant, namely, Vikram Singh, which was rejected on 30.07.2016 after calling for the police report. For the above incident, the present F.I.R. was lodged through an application under Section 156(3) moved by the prosecutrix for the second time. Another F.I.R. was lodged by the father-in-law of the prosecutrix against the uncle of the applicant and two others in which bail has been granted by the court below. It has further been submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the present F.I.R. has been lodged with false and frivolous allegation, in order to exert pressure upon the applicant solely by way of counter blast to the earlier cases lodged by the family members of the applicant against the family members of prosecutrix. As per the medical report, no external or internal injury was found on her body. It is further argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the co-accused, namely, Vikram Singh i.e. uncle of the present applicant has already been enlarged on bail by this Bench of this Court vide order dated 26th March, 2019 passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 11902 of 2019. The case of the present applicant is similar and identical to that of the aforesaid co-accused. As such the present applicant is also liable to be enlarged on bail. The applicant has one criminal antecedent to his credit except the present one and the same has satisfactorily been explained in paragraph-15 of the affidavit filed in support of the present bail application. 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. The applicant is in jail since 7th May, 2019.
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. However, the learned A.G.A. could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the material on record as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and 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.
(Manju Rani Chauhan, J.) Order Date :- 6.6.2019 Sushil/-