Court No. - 69
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18390 of 2021 Applicant :- Ramu Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Shriman Narayan Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State through video conferencing.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. Earlier, missing report of victim was lodged on 21.12.2020 by the informant (father of victim) and according to that, age of victim was around 18 years. Thereafter, on 28.12.2020, FIR was lodged mentioning therein that, for the age of victim, he will submit the certificate after obtaining from the school. It is next submitted that applicant has yet not appeared in High School Examination. As per medical report, age of victim is around 18 years. Statement of victim was also recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. as well as under Section 164 Cr.P.C. in which she has not supported the case of prosecution and stated that by her own will, she eloped with the applicant and had also made physical relationship with him. Though medical report as well as statements recorded under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. is not part of the record and this fact may be verified from the case diary available with learned AGA. Applicant has no criminal history and he is in jail since 29.01.2021, undertakes that he will not misuse the liberty, if granted.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the prayer but fairly submitted that above referred documents are available in case diary. He next submitted that as per medical report dated 30.01.2021, age of victim is around 18 years and also supported the case of applicant denying the prosecution story in her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C.
Considering the material on record as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, larger mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, let the applicant- Ramu, involved in Case Crime No. 227 of 2020, under Sections- 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station- Barhan, District Agra, be enlarged on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad. The concerned Court/Authority/Jail 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.
This bail order would be subject to the fulfilment of following conditions:-
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
3. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
4. 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;
5. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail 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.
6. 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
7. In case the applicant has been enlarged on short term bail as per the order of committee constituted under the orders of Hon'ble Supreme Court his bail shall be effective after the period of short term bail comes to an end.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 26.5.2021/Arvind