SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Irshad And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 5 November, 2019

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. – 78

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 42271 of 2019

Applicant :- Irshad And Another

Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Krishna Chaurasia

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

Counter affidavit filed on behalf of the State in Court today is taken on record.

Heard Mr. Ram Krishna Chaurasiya, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. Madnesh Prasad Singh, learned counsel for the State as well as perused the material on record.

The present bail application has been filed by the applicants-Irshad and Chandu @ Chand Babu with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 691 of 2018, under Section 354 I.P.C., Section 3 (2) 5A S.C./SectionS.T. Act and Section 8 POCSO Act, Police Station-Kotwali Nagar, District-Banda, during the pendency of the trial.

It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that the first information report has been lodged on 17th October, 2018 by Ranno Devi mother of the victim, namely, Kumari Jyoti against as many as 14 named persons including the applicants i.e. after one and half months for which no plausible explanation has been given, which makes the prosecution case doubtful. In the first information report, it has been alleged that the informant belonged to scheduled caste category and her husband was suffering ailment. It has been further alleged that all the accused persons did not want the informant along with his family to live in their colony and for the said wishes, earlier they broke the door of the house of the informant for which she made complaint before the District Magistrate. All the accused persons also molested the daughter of the informant i.e. victim and they also harassed the informant and her family for which she has lodged the first information report. It has further been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that though the first information report has been lodged against as many as 14 named accused persons including the applicants, only the applicants have been charge-sheeted and other accused persons have been exonerated, which makes the prosecution case doubtful. It has further been argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the entire prosecution story as unfolded in the first information report appears to be wholly concocted as no date of molestation of the victim and harassment of the informant and her family members by the applicants, was mentioned in the first information report. The applicants are innocent. The real fact is that the applicants and the informant were living in a same colony and the informant threw garbage in front of the house of the applicants and when the applicants raised objection to the same, the first informant created a false and fabricated story and lodged the present first information report in order to only harass the applicants. The applicants have no criminal antecedents to their credit except the present one. It is next contended that there is no possibility of the applicants of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and in case, the applicants are enlarged on bail, the applicants shall not misuse the liberty of bail. The applicants are jail since 16th September, 2019.

Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicants but he could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicants.

Considering the the nature of the offence, material/evidence brought on record, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Versus State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, let the applicants involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on their furnishing personal bonds and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions:-

(i) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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.

(ii) The applicants 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 of the Indian Penal Code.

(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicants fail to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against them, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(iv) The applicants 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 applicants 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 them in accordance with law.

It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.

(Manju Rani Chauhan, J.)

Order Date :- 5.11.2019

Sushil/-

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation