Court No. - 67
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28730 of 2019 Applicant :- Shyam Narayan @ Modal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- B.S. Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Despite service of notice none has appeared on behalf of private respondent.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the material on record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no. 189 of 2018, under Sections 363, 366, 376, 342 IPC and Section 5/6 and 16/17 POCSO Act, P.S. Harraiya, District Basti, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that on the application under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. of the father of the girl, the FIR was lodged after two months of the incident, under Sections 363, 366 IPC against the applicant. The girl has returned back after 8 months of the incident. Both of them joined the company and went to Faizabad and thereafter proceeded to Badodra (Gujrat) and they remain stayed for a period of 8 months without any alarm or objection. Her conduct shows that she is consensual relationship with the applicant. According to medical report she is aged about 18 years. He lastly submitted that the applicant is in jail since 13.03.2019, is entitled to be enlarged on bail during the pendency of trial.
Per contra learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and could not dispute the aforementioned facts.
Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for bail.
In view of the above, let the applicant- Shyam Narayan @ Modal, be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in case crime no. 189 of 2018, under Sections 363, 366, 376, 342 IPC and Section 5/6 and 16/17 POCSO Act, P.S. Harraiya, District Basti, with the following conditions:-
(i) THE APPLICANT SHALL FILE AN UNDERTAKING TO THE EFFECT THAT THEY 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 THEIR COUNSEL. IN CASE OF THEIR ABSENCE , WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSE 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 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 APPLICANTS ARE 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.
(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 APPLICANTS.
However, it is made clear that any 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 a 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 :- 30.9.2019/v.k.updh.