Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23964 of 2018 Applicant :- Shishupal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Irfan,Mahender Pal Singh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Chandresh Kumar Chaurasiya
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
Detag Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 23704 of 2018 which appears to have been wrongly connected to this matter.
This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Shishupal in connection with Criminal Complaint Case No. 562 of 2017 under Section 452, 376D, 506 IPC, P.S. Shahabad, District Rampur.
Heard Sri Mohd. Irfan along with Sri Mahender Pal Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Akhilesh Kumar Mishra, learned AGA along with Sri Raj Kumar Yadav, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case, which is a motivated prosecution. Spelling out the details of that motivation, the learned counsel for the applicant has pointed out that an FIR was lodged by co-accused Veer Singh against the husband of the prosecutrx, Amarpal alleging gang rape of his wife by the said Amarpal along with an unknown offender giving rise to Case Crime no.240 of 2017, under Sections 376- D, 506 IPC at Police Station Shahabad, District Rampur. The occurrence in the said FIR is one dated 24.04.2017 and the FIR was registered on 29.04.2017. The applicant is a witness in the said case, whose name figures in the FIR, as such. The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that co- accused, Sunil Gupta, who is the Village Pradhan is pursuing the case on behalf of Veer Singh, where Veer Singh is the husband of the prosecutrix and first informant of the aforesaid case brought against the prosecutrix's husband. It is submitted that in order to browbeat the applicant and other co-accused, the prosecutrix has filed the present complaint case, wherein the three accused are Sunil Gupta, Shishupal, the applicant and Veer Singh, the husband of the prosecutrix in Case Crime no.240 of 2017 (supra) are arraigned as the accused. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the prosecutrix has brought the present complaint, wherein the applicant has been summoned to stand his trial along with other co-accused vide order dated 16.12.2017, is a motivated complaint in order to coerce the applicant not to depose in favour of the prosecution in the case against her husband. There is not a grain of truth to the allegations in the complaint or any evidence in support of it. There is no medico-legal report on record to lend corroboration to an allegation of the present kind, which is required in abundance in a case that is otherwise patently a motivated and false prosecution. It is further argued that on identical allegations, this Court by order of date passed in Criminal Misc. Bail Application no.23439 of 2018 has admitted co-accused, Sunil Gupta to the concession of bail, and, therefore, the applicant is entitled to the benefit of parity. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the background of the said facts, that are evident on record, there is no justification to detain the applicant in jail pending trial.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but does not dispute the factum of parity.
Considering the overall facts and circumstances, the nature of allegations, the gravity of offence, the severity of the punishment, the evidence appearing against the accused, in particular, the fact that the applicant is a witness in Case Crime no.240 of 2017 (supra), where the husband of the prosecutrix is an accused, the fact that the likelihood of the present complaint being brought to coerce the applicant appears to be there prima facie, the fact that there is no medico-legal report on record to corroborate the allegations of gang rape, but without expressing any opinion on merits, this Court finds it to be a fit case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application stands allowed.
Let the applicant Shishupal involved in Criminal Complaint Case No. 562 of 2017 under Section 452, 376D, 506 IPC P.S. Shahabad, District Rampur be released on bail on executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
iii) The applicant shall appear on the date fixed by the trial court.
iv) The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which the applicant is accused, or suspected of the commission.
v) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
In case of default of any of the conditions enumerated above, the complainant would be free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.
It is clarified that anything said in this order is limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. It is clarified that the trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence lead unaffected by anything said in this order.
Order Date :- 22.1.2019 Deepak