1. Heard learned counsel for the accused-applicant as well as learned Additional Government Advocate and gone through the entire record.
Mr. Shivam Tiwari, Advocate, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Rahul Shukla, learned counsel for complainant, has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant. Counter affidavit filed by him is taken on record.
2. By means of this application under Section 439 CrPC, the accused-applicant seeks bail in FIR No.0304 of 2020, under Sections 313, 323, 504 and 506 IPC lodged at Police Station Tadiyawan, District Hardoi.
3. The present accused-applicant is father of the main accused, Mohit Shukla, who is an accused under Section 376 IPC. Co-accused, Mukesh Awasthi and, his wife took the prosecutrix to a Nursing Home where they got aborted a 7 months old fetus, which she conceived from cohabitation/sexual offence committed by the co-accused, Mohit Shukla. Allegation against the present accused-applicant is that when the complainant made complaint to him with respect to the said act of his son, the accused-applicant reprimanded her and, after getting resignation letter signed, ousted her from the service/College.
4. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant submits that the prosecutrix was a consenting party. The marriage was almost settled, but she got pregnant in the meantime, and because of medical condition, decision for abortion was taken. He further submits that there is every likelihood of the matter getting settled between the prosecutrix and the co-accused-Mohit Shukla and, the accused-applicant will see that the marriage takes place between them. Co-accused-Mukesh Awasthi has already been enlarged on bail by this Court vide order dated 18.12.2020. The accused-applicant has been in jail since 28.09.2020.
5. Considering all the above facts and circumstances of the case, perusing the record and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for granting bail.
6. Let applicant-Shyam Mohan Shukla be released on bail in the aforesaid case on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate/Court concerned, subject to following conditions :-
(i) The applicant shall make endeavour to see that the marriage between the prosecutrix and Mohit Shukla takes place and he will convince Mohit Shukla and the prosecutrix both.
(ii) 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.
(iii) 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.
(iv) 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.
(v) 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.
[D.K.Singh,J.] Order Date :- 4.2.2021 MVS/-