Court No. - 43 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 20366 of 2021 Applicant :- Rishikant Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Hari Narayan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Matter taken up through video conferencing.
Heard Sri Hari Narayan Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Virendra Kumar Maurya, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant- Rishikant, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No. 119 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 452, 354, 376, 511, 323, 325, 503, 506 I.P.C., registered at Police Station Tajganj, District Agra.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that in the first information report, 06 persons including the applicant have been arrayed as accused. It is argued that occurrence in the present case has been shown to be of 28.02.2021 at about 10 am whereas the first information report has been registered on 04.03.2021 at about 18:28 hrs by the victim which is after a delay of about 04 days which is totally unexplained and goes to show that the same is an afterthought just in order to falsely implicate and harass the applicant. It is argued that the allegations as levelled in the first information report regarding an attempt of rape by the applicant on the first informant is just for the reason to give a different colour to the present case and the same is not supported by any medical evidence. Learned counsel has placed before the Court Annexure-3 to the affidavit and argued that the first informant who alleges herself to have been attempted to be raped, refused her medical examination and the doctor has specifically mentioned that her internal medical examination was refused as she had stated that there was only an attempt of rape upon her.
Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn the attention of the Court to Annexure-5 being the medical examination report of the four injured persons namely Smt. Pancho Devi, Amit, Johnny and Pushpendra and while placing the same has argued that Smt. Pancho Devi has been noted to have received 06 injuries out of which except for injury no.1, after X-Ray examination it was opined to be grievous in nature and the other injuries are simple, Amit has been stated to have received 05 injuries and the opinion of the doctor is that except for injury no.1 the other injuries are simple in nature but there is no supplementary medical examination report to show the nature of injury no.1, Johnny has received 03 injuries of which injury no.1 & 2 were referred for X-Ray examination whereas the 3rd injury was opined to be simple in nature out of which injury no.2 was opined to be grievous in nature and the fourth injured Pushpendra was stated to have received 02 injuries of which all were stated to be simple in nature. It is argued that as per the prosecution case, no specification whatsoever has been given by the first informant and the prosecution regarding the role of the 06 accused persons including the applicant for assaulting the alleged injured persons. It is further argued that the present first information report is a counter-blast to the first information report lodged on 02.03.2021 at 12:25 hrs by Smt. Gyan Devi wife of the applicant for an incident which took place on 28.02.2021 at 10 am which was registered as Case Crime No. 0117 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 452, 323, 354, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Statin Tajganj, District Agra against 09 accused persons namely Jhonny, Killu @ Amit, Pushpendra, Abhishek, Subhash, Arti, Urmila, Reena and Raju. It is argued that the present first information report is a counter-blast and the implication of the applicant is false and the allegations of attempt to rape is for the reason to colour the first information report for ulterior motive.
It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has also been pointed out that the applicant is not having any criminal history as stated in para 24 of the affidavit and he is in jail since 18.03.2021 and there is no likelihood of early conclusion of trial and hence, the applicant may be released on bail during pendency of trial.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is named in the first information report and has been assigned the role of attempt to commit rape upon the first informant and further joining hands with the other accused persons in the assault. It is argued that the present incident has been fully narrated in the first information report. It is argued that the prayer for bail be rejected.
After having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, it is apparent that the first information report was lodged at prior point of time by the wife of the applicant against 09 accused persons including the first informant of the present case. The present first information report in which the applicant is being prosecuted has been lodged 02 days after the first information has been lodged by the wife of the applicant. The allegation of an attempt to rape also prima facie, has no corroboration as there has been no indication of any physical violence on the body of the first informant. The common and general role has been assigned to all the six persons without any specification of the act of causing injuries to the alleged injured persons.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence, the period of detention already undergone, the unlikelihood of early conclusion of trial and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
Let the applicant- Rishikant, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.
ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) 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.
(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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 I.P.C.
(v) 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229- A IPC.
(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.
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.
The bail application is allowed.
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 :- 27.5.2021 AS Rathore Digitally signed by Justice Samit Gopal Date: 2021.05.28 16:13:13 IST Reason: Document Owner Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad