Court No. - 42
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23330 of 2019 Applicant :- Rajeev Chaturvedi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- V.S. Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Ms. Anjum Haq, Advocate, has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of complainant, which is taken on record.
Heard Sri V.S. Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Nafees Ahmad, learned counsel for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant – Rajeev Chaturvedi with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.58 of 2019, under Sections 376, 496 I.P.C., Police Station Babina, District Jhansi.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. It is argued that in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. the prosecutrix, who is nearly 30 years, has stated that the applicant was her facebook friend since 2013. Both of them are working. The prosecutrix met the applicant in the year 2015 in Bhopal where after promising to marry her the applicant established physical relationship with the prosecutrix. It is argued that the prosecutrix victim was mature enough to understand as to what extent she should go in relations with the applicant, under promise of being married with her. It has further been contended that since 2015 she has not made any complaint and continued her relationship with the applicant, which shows that the parties are consenting and in order to exert pressure upon the applicant, the present FIR has been lodged. It is next contended that 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 and the applicant is languishing in jail since 07.04.2019. Accordingly, he requests for bail.
Learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned counsel for the State 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 the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, 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 not indulge in any criminal activity.
(ii) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not pressurize the prosecution witnesses.
(iv) The applicant shall regularly appear on the dates fixed by the trial court unless his personal attendance is exempted by the trial court.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, it will be open to the opposite parties to approach the Court for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 4.6.2019 Anand Sri./-