HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. – 67
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 36673 of 2019
Applicant :- Lalu Alias Tulsiram
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Pati Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon’ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.
By means of this application, the applicant who is involved in case crime no.181 of 2019, under Section 376, Section352, Section506 IPC, Police Station-Jahanabad, District-Pilibhit is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.
Submission made by learned counsel for the applicant is that the FIR was registered by the victim against as many as four persons including the applicant. The next contention is that this is the bail application under the added section of SectionIPC. On the earlier occasion, the applicant was bailed out under Section 354 IPC on 08.07.2019. Thereafter during investigation, Section 376 IPC has been added among the pre-existing sections of SectionIPC. It is a counter-blast case whereby in the statement of victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., a different picture altogether has come up and she has given a vivid description of attempt to rape by the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 22.06.2019.
Learned A.G.A opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts and the legal submissions as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let the applicant-Lalu Alias Tulsiram, involved in case crime no.181 of 2019, under Section 376, Section352, Section506 IPC, Police Station-Jahanabad, District-Pilibhit be released on bail 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 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.
(ii) 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 SectionIPC.
(iii) 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 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 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.
(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 APPLICANT.
However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his bail so granted by this court.
Order Date :- 23.9.2019