Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 29358 of 2019 Applicant :- Seema Devi @ Gudiya Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ravi Prakash Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Ravi Prakash Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri P.K. Shahi, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-Seema Devi @ Gudiya with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 192 of 2019, under Sections 363 and 366 I.P.C., Police Station-Shahpur, District-Gorakhpur, during the pendency of the trial.
It is argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that for the alleged incident dated 28th March, 2019, the present first information report has been lodged on 7th April, 2019 by Nand Kishor i.e. father of the victim, namely, Neesha against two named accused persons including the present applicant after 10 days from the date of the alleged incident for which no plausible explanation has been given which makes the prosecution case doubtful. In the first information report, it has been alleged that on 28th March, 2019, neighbour of informant, namely, Vikki and his mother, namely, Seema Devi @ Guddi enticed away the victim. The informant made best effort to search for her but he could not succeed to find her. The victim has been recovered safely and her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has been recorded, wherein she has stated that on 28th March, 2019, she went to Mumbai for visiting along with the co-accused Vikki on her own free will without informing her parents. They were child-hood friends. They went to Mumbai through Lucknow by train and they stayed at railway station of Mumbai. On 8th April, 2019 the victim has informed about the same to her father on mobile phone. No physical relation has been established between them. They were only best friend to each other. She went to Mumbai on her own free will. It has further been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that perusal of the aforesaid statement of the victim indicates that she went to Mumbai on her own free will and the co-accused Vikki has not taken her without her own free will. It is also urged that in the aforesaid statement, the victim has not stated anything about the applicant. Therefore, no case for the offence punishable under Sections 363 and 366 I.P.C. is made out against the applicant. The applicant is innocent and being the mother of the co-accused, namely, Vikki she has been falsely implicated in the present case. The victim has refused to get herself medically examined. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. It is next contended that there is no possibility of the applicant 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. The applicant is in jail since 1st May, 2019.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail. However, the learned A.G.A. could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the material/evidence brought on record, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, 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 file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates 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 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.
(iii) 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. 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.
(iv) 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 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.
(Manju Rani Chauhan, J.) Order Date :- 31.7.2019 Sushil/-