SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Ramu vs State Of U.P. And Another on 15 July, 2021

Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.


?Court No. – 66

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 15780 of 2021

Applicant :- Ramu

Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Applicant :- Ramesh Chandra Upadhyay

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Ali Zamin,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

The present bail application has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 116 of 2020, under Sections 354 I.P.C. and 7/8 POSCO Act, Police Station Sikandra, District Agra.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that according to the FIR version applicant took away two daughters of the informant aged about 5 and 4 years in a jungle and molested one aged about 5 years. He submits that in statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. she has stated that applicant took away in a jungle and lowred her panty as well as his own. As per medical report, mother of the victim has refused to conduct internal medical examination of the victim. He further submits that applicant had given Rs. 25,000/- to the marriage of informant’s daughter in the year 2018 with the ulterior motive not to return the money he has been implicated in the case. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away from the judicial process or tampering with the witnesses and, in case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, the applicant shall not misuse the liberty of bail. It is next contended that there is no criminal history of the applicant and he is languishing in jail since 03.03.2020.

Per contra, learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail prayer of the applicant by submitting that as per allegations applicant by giving money took away the victim in a jungle molested her, therefore, he is not entitled for bail.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case as well as submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and also perusing the material on record, refusal of the mother of victim for internal medical examination, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, the applicant is entitled for bail, let the applicant- Ramu involved in aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned, subject to the following conditions :-

(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he will not tamper with the evidence and will not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and will cooperate with the trial. The applicant 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 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.

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

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. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.

Order Date :- 15.7.2021




Leave a Reply

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

Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link
MyNation Times Magzine

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.


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