HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. – 43
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 26986 of 2019
Applicant :- Naim
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Zafar Abbas
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon’ble Pankaj Naqvi,J.
Rejoinder affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Heard Sri Zafar Abbas, learned counsel for applicant, Dr. S.B. Maurya, the learned A.G.A. and perused the records.
Applicant – Naim seeks bail in Case Crime No.203/2019, under Section 354A, Section376, Section506 IPC, 3/4 POCSO Act, and 67 SectionI.T. Act, P.S. Shahabad, District – Rampur.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that initially, the FIR dated 3.4.2019 came to be lodged against the applicant and co-accused Nizam under Section 354 IPC, during investigation a witness namely Mahipal son of Shyam Lal, alleged that a meeting took place in the house of the informant on 6.4.2010, where it was alleged by one Banti that the applicant and co-accused are now entangled in a criminal case, they shall be made to pay Rs.1 lac each, else they shall be roped for sexual assault, as the family of the applicant had not supported the candidature of said Mahipal for Pradhan, followed with the statement of both the victims under Section 161/ Section164 CrPC alleging sexual assault against applicant and co-accused Nizam for the first time, FIR is malafidely motivated, applicant claims to have no previous criminal history as alleged in paragraph-3, is languishing in jail since 19.4.2019, undertakes not to misuse the liberty, he be enlarged on bail.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail, but does not dispute the criminal history.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, 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- Naim involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond and two heavy 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 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 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.
(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. 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.
(iv) The applicant 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 applicant is 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.
Order Date :- 25.11.2019