SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Ram Sewak vs State Of U.P. on 30 September, 2019

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. – 67

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 37130 of 2019

Applicant :- Ram Sewak

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Rajendra Kumar 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. 392 of 2019, under Sections 376, Section354, Section452, Section504, Section506 IPC, P.S. Faridpur, District Bareilly, is seeking enlargement on bail during the trial.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim herself was lodged the FIR against the applicant, under Sections 376, Section354, Section452, Section504, Section506 IPC. This FIR was registered after five days of the incident, on 13.06.2019, without levelling any allegation of rape upon her by the applicant. In her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. also she has not made any allegation against the applicant of committing rape upon her. However, in statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she has stated that the applicant has committed rape upon her on gun point, which is incorrect and is an after thought. It is contended that it is clearcut case of tutoring and mind wash where the victim herself is the informant who lodged the FIR under Section 354 IPC, but eventually landed in the arena of Section 376 IPC without any justification. Medico-legal report do not support the prosecution case. He lastly submitted that the applicant is in jail since 02.07.2019, 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.

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- Ram Sevak, be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned in case crime no. 392 of 2019, under Sections 376, Section354, Section452, Section504, Section506 IPC, P.S. Faridpur, District Bareilly, 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 :- 30.9.2019

v.k.updh.

 

 

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