Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 19999 of 2018 Applicant :- Sanju Alias Jan Mohammad Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no. 113 of 2018 under Sections 366, 376 IPC, P.S. Rasoolabad, District- Kanpur Dehat is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his application for bail submits that the applicant is innocent. He has been falsely implicated. It is further submitted that the belated FIR by 3 days was lodged by father of the victim on 09.03.2018 under section 366 IPC for the incident said to have taken place on 06.03.2018 as case crime no. 113 of 2018 against three accused persons including the present applicant and to unknown persons with the allegation that on 06.03.2018 around 7 in the eventing her daughter went to attend the call of nature, she was enticed away by wife of Noor Mohammad and two unknown persons. Since then her daughter never return back. It is submitted that no role has been attributed to the applicant for alleged enticement. The police after lodging the FIR has recovered the girl on 10.03.2018 from Bilhaud railway station, where she was sitting behind waiting room. On making enquiry, she reveal that Sanju and wife of Noor Mohammad has enticed her away and they wants to take her some unknown destination by train. She was recovered around 20:00 hours and on the same day her statement was recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C. in which she has stated that her father has got her engaged with one Sharif son of Noor Mohammad with whom she was in a constant touch on telephone. In her statement recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C. she states that on account of demand of dowry by Sharif, the marriage at that time could not be solemnized and Sharif through Sanju has kidnapped her at the residence of Sharif where Sanju has out raged her modesty and his mother was guarding out side the door.
Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn the attention of the court to annexure-5 of the petition which shows that ultimately Sharif and the victim got married on 09.04.2018 and their marriage certificate issued by Registrar of Marriage Kanpur Nagar, Zone-2 dated 09.04.2018 is annexed along with nikahnama. Her medical report belies the allegation of rape as there is no external or internal injuries over her person. Her hymen was old healed. It is further submitted that the applicant has not attributed any role of kidnapping. All of sudden in her statement recorded u/s 161 Cr.P.C., she has attributed the role of committing rape upon the applicant is slightly strange and more over, the victim is now a married wife of Sharif. It has lastly been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is in jail since 10.03.2018 having no criminal antecedents except the present one.
Learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Sanju Alias Jan Mohammad, 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 SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT HE/SHE 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/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER 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/HER, 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 THE HIM/HER 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.
However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his/her bail so granted by this court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.
Order Date :- 28.5.2018 Nisha