Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that general role has been assigned. The prosecutrix for the purpose of blackmailing has lodged the F.I.R. against the five persons. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that even the date on which the rape is alleged to have been committed has not been mentioned in the F.I.R. The entire F.I.R. is absolutely vague. As per medical examination of the victim conducted on 19.02.2020, no visible injury has been found on her private parts. The co-accused persons namely Anoop Kumar, Satish Kumar and Navraj Singh have been enlarged on bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court. All the bail order is on record as Annexure A-7. Another co-accused namely Dilip Yadav has been on bail vide order dated 05.01.2021 passed in bail No. 8520/2020 by the coordinate Bench of this Court. It is next contended that the applicant is languishing in jail since 20.02.2020 without having any previous criminal antecedents. Learned counsel for the applicant seeks parity with the order of the co-accused.
It is further submitted that there is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from judicial custody or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, for the period for which he is in jail and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail on the ground of parity.
Let the applicant, Vishnu Narayan @ Vishv Narayan Mishra, involved in Case Crime/F.I.R. No. 48/2020 under Sections 115/279/337/376D/386/388/506 IPC, Police Station - Bhangarmau, District - Unnao, be released on bail on his 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 the evidence during the trial.
(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
(iii) 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 him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iv) 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.
(v) 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.
(vi) 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.
Order Date :- 18.1.2021 R.C.