Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 23439 of 2018 Applicant :- Sunil Gupta 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.
Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.
This is a bail application on behalf of the applicant Sunil Gupta 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, learned counsel for the applicant has pointed out that an FIR was lodged by co-accused Veer Singh against the husband of the prosecutirx, 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 the Pradhan of the Village and was pursuing the case on behalf of Veer Singh against the husband of the prosecutrix. Shishupal is a witness in the said FIR lodged by Veer Singh against the prosecutrix's husband. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that in order to bargain her husband's exculpation in Case Crime no.240 of 2017 (supra), the prosecutrix has filed the present complaint on 11.05.2017 regarding an incident dated 30.04.2017 on patently fabricated allegations, where the applicant, Sunil Gupta, Shishupal, who is a prosecution witness in Case Crime no.240 of 2017 lodged by Veer Singh and Veer Singh, who has lodged the FIR against the prosecutrix's husband regarding the gang rape of his wife with an unknown offender, have all been arraigned as accused. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that the Magistrate has proceeded to summon the applicant to stand his trial along with other co-accused vide an order dated 16.12.2017. He is in jail in connection with said complaint case since 28.05.2018. It is pointed out further by the learned counsel appearing for the applicant that a perusal of the injury report shows that the prosecutrix has not sustained any such injury as may be compatible with a case of gang rape, alleged. There is no medico-legal report on record to lend corroboration to an allegation of the present kind, which is required abundance in a case that is otherwise patently a motivated and false prosecution. The prosecution is entirely out and out a device to bail out her husband through abuse of process of criminal law by compelling the co-accused Veer Singh, his witness and the applicant, who is pursuing the matter on his behalf to withdraw from the prosecution of Case Crime no.240 of 2017 (supra). 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.
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 the Village Pradhan, who is pursuing the case of co-accused Veer Singh against the prosecurix's husband relating to a case of gang rape of Veer Singh's wife, the fact that the witness of the said case, Shishupal and Veer Singh also have been implicated by the prosecutrix in the same complaint, on the same allegations, filed hardly within a few days of registration of Case Crime no.240 of 2017 (supra), 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 Sunil Gupta 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