HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. – 67
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 48380 of 2019
Applicant :- Jai Prakash Yadav Alias J. P. Yadav
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Shyam Sunder Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon’ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
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. 31 of 2019, under Sections 376D, Section354, Section323 IPC and Section 5/6 POCSO Act, P.S. Tahbarpur, District Azamgarh, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim herself has lodged the FIR under Sectionsection 354 IPC against applicant and two co-accused namely Anil Yadav and Firoz Yadav with the allegation that they have misbehaved with her. As per the medical report the age of the victim is about 19 years. In the statement of victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she has stated that the applicant had committed rape upon her. It is next contended that the victim has changed her version and shifting stand every stage. He lastly submitted that the applicant is in jail since 29.06.2019, 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.
The submissions advanced by learned counsel for the applicant appears to be quite convincing and appealing for the purposes of bail only.
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- Jai Prakash Yadav @ J.P. Yadav, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime on his 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 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 SectionIPC.
(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 SectionIPC.
(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 :- 13.11.2019