Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 33243 of 2021 Applicant :- Rajnesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned brief holder appearing on behalf of the State, and perused the material brought on record.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated due to ulterior motive. It is next submitted that there is inordinate delay in lodging of the First Information Report without any plausible explanation. From perusal of the statement of the victim recorded under section 164 Cr.P.C. it reveals that she sat on the motorbike of the applicant and this shows that she was a consenting party. As a matter of fact, victim who is major both the applicant and victim being in relationship with each other victim had gone with applicant out of her own sweet will and lived with the applicant. It is next submitted that the victim went with the applicant to different places where she must have come across many people at different points of time, she was free to make alarm for her safety, but she kept mum. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. Further submission is that applicant who is in jail since 06.12.2020, has no other previous criminal history and there is also no possibility of his either fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses. Applicant also undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant, but could not dispute the above submissions.
Having heard the submissions of learned counsel of both sides, nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, reformative theory of punishment, and larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh v. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 2 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a case of bail.
Let applicant- Rajnesh, be released on bail in Case Crime No. 413 of 2020, under Sections- 366, 376 IPC, Police Station- Kuravali, District- Mainpuri, on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of magistrate/court concerned, subject to following conditions:-
(i) The applicant will co-operate with the trail and remain present personally on each and every date fixed after release. (ii) The applicant will not tamper with the prosecution evidence and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.(iii) The applicant will not indulge in any unlawful activities. (iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of this bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 28.10.2021 ssm