Court No. - 52
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16283 of 2021 Applicant :- Umesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
Heard Sri Vivek Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ankit Srivastava, learned brief holder for the State and perused the material on record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant Umesh, seeking enlargement on bail during trial in connection with Case Crime No.19 of 2021, under Section(s) 376, 452, 323, 506 I.P.C. registered at P.S. Baniyapur, District Sambhal.
Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is argued that the present F.I.R. has been lodged with an unexplained delay of about two years from the date of first alleged allegation of rape. It is argued that the victim is a married woman having a child and as per the F.I.R. she states that the applicant raped her in the year 2019 and had recorded a video and clicked photographs on the basis of which he used to blackmail her and then on 2.2.2021 he again came to her house when her husband was away, along with co-accused Neeraj and committed rape upon her and clicked photographs, after which her husband came to the house and found him and tried to stopped, on which he received injury but the applicant ran away.
It is argued that the said story is totally a false and concocted story. It is further argued that no such photographs or video clip as alleged have been recovered during investigation. The victim is a married lady and was a consenting party. It is argued that there is no explanation whatsoever of the two years since the alleged first rape in lodging of the F.I.R. It is argued that the applicant has no other criminal antecedents as stated in para-18 of the affidavit and is in jail since 7.2.2021.
Per contra, learned AGA opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the applicant is named in the F.I.R. and in the statements of the victim and is alleged to have committed rape upon her, but could not dispute the aforesaid arguments as raised.
After having heard learned counsels for the parties and perusing the record, it is apparent that the victim is a married lady, the F.I.R. is delayed by about two years from the allegation of first rape being committed upon her for which there is no plausible explanation given by the victim.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of this case, the nature of evidence and also the absence of any convincing material to indicate the possibility of tampering with the evidence, this Court is of the view that the applicant may be enlarged on bail.
Let the applicant- Umesh, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
i) The applicant will not tamper with prosecution evidence and will not harm or harass the victim/complainant in any manner whatsoever.
ii) The applicant will abide the orders of court, will attend the court on every date and will not delay the disposal of trial in any manner whatsoever.
(iii) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he 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.
(iv) The applicant will not misuse the liberty of bail in any manner whatsoever. 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., 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 I.P.C.
(V) 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 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 and the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229- A IPC.
(vi) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.
The identity, status and residential proof of sureties will be verified by court concerned and in case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, court concerned will be at liberty to cancel the bail and send the applicant to prison.
The bail application is allowed.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 27.7.2021 Naresh (Samit Gopal,J.)