SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Rajan Chaudhary vs State Of U.P. on 15 April, 2020


?In Chamber

Case :- BAIL No. – 2680 of 2018

Applicant :- Rajan Chaudhary

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Sahu,Devi Prasad Maurya,Vijayendra Prakash Tripat

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

1. By means of this application under Section 439 CrPC, the accused-applicant seeks bail in Crime/FIR No.0037 of 2018, under Sections 363, 366 and 354 IPC and 7/8 POCSO Act lodged at Police Station Inayat Nagar, District Faizabad.

Initially, the FIR was lodged except under Section 354 IPC, which has been added during the course of investigation.

2. The FIR came to be registered on a written complaint of father of the prosecutrix, alleging that the prosecutrix, aged around 16 years, was a student of Class-XI in Vidya Mandir Inter College. On 01.02.2018, the prosecutrix was standing in front of a stationery shop to go to the school at around 9.30 a.m; at that time, Principal of the School, Mr. Rasbihari Yadav, came by his Scorpio Car, and persuaded the prosecutrix to sit in the car; many persons witnessed the prosecutrix entering the car of the Principal; when the prosecutrix did not come back from the school, the complainant contacted the Principal, but he did not get any satisfactory reply from him; the complainant enquired from his relatives, but whereabouts of the prosecutrix could not be known. It was also alleged that the prosecutrix was enticed away by the Principal. On the basis of this complaint, the FIR was registered against Mr. Rasbihar Yadav, Principal.

3. The prosecutrix was recovered and in her statement she had said that she was a student of Class-XI; she did not know the date and month of her birth, however, year is 2002; she said that her father scolded her, therefore, on 01.02.2018, when she went to give exams, from examination center, she went to Abu Sarai, the residence of Rajan Chaudhary, the accused-applicant, who wanted to make a telephone call to her father, but she stopped him on the ground that he would again scold her; she remained with him for nine days; after nine days, when father of Rajan Chaudhary, the accused-applicant, was going to drop her at her residence, the police arrested her.

4. Considering the statement of the prosecutrix that she went on her own volition and out of her free-will to live with Rajan Chaudhary, the accused-applicant, the accused-applicant did not have any legal duty to take her to her parents. There is no allegation regarding any wrong doing by the accused-applicant, and the fact that the accused-applicant is in jail since 13.02.2018, as narrated in para-20 of the affidavit filed in support of the bail application, I find it to be a fit case for grant of bail.

5. Let applicant-Rajan Chaudhary, accused of above-mentioned FIR/crime number, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions, which are 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 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; and

(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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.

(v) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.

(vi) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.

(vii) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.


Order Date :- 15.4.2020




Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2021 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