Court No. - 83
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16648 of 2021 Applicant :- Rajesh Rajbhar @ Kambali Rajbhar Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Kumar,Sudhanshu Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vikas Tiwari
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
In pursuance of the order dated 22.11.2021 a personal affidavit of Ghule Sushil Chandrabhan, presently posted as Superintendent of Police, Mau has been filed annexing the statement of the victim recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. is taken on record. In para four of the affidavit it has specifically been mentioned that the victim as well as co-accused Sagar Rajbhar and one baby of eight months have bee recovered on 15.12.2021.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 585 of 2019, under Sections 363, 366, 120B, 506 IPC, at Police Station Kotwali, District Mau.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has not committed the alleged offence. The applicant has no concern with the alleged incident. It has further been submitted that in her statement recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C the victim has not made any allegations against the applicant and co-accused Sagar and she has stated that she has solemnized her marriage with the co- accused Sagar. It has further been submitted that the victim has refused to medical examination. It has further been submitted that the applicant is the uncle of co-accused Sagar. There is no criminal history of the applicant. He has further submitted that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicant is in jail since 16.2.2021.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the informant opposes the application for bail.
Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusal of record and considering the complicity of accused, severity of punishment as well as totality of facts and circumstances, at this stage without commenting on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Rajesh Rajbhar @ Kambali Rajbhar, who is involved in aforementioned case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(i) 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.
(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 IPC.
(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., 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 IPC.
(iv) 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.
(v) The Trial Court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial within a period of one year after the release of the applicant.
In case of breach of of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
Order Date :- 17.12.2021/A.