HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. – 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 35898 of 2019
Applicant :- Seeta Ram
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Kapil Tiwari,Indra Deo Yadav,Suneel,Yashpal Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Seeta Ram, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No.378 of 2018, under Sections 452, 376 IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Mubarakpur, District- Azamgarh, during pendency of trial.
Submission is that statement of victim as deaf and dumb has been recorded as per Section164 (5-A) Cr.P.C., but from the statement of the victim, the offence of rape alleged against the applicant is not made out. At the most offence under Section 354 IPC is made out. The applicant is related as collateral of the victim. He has been falsely implicated in the present case with some ulterior motive. The medical report of the victim does not supports the prosecution case. The applicant has no criminal history to his credit and he is languishing in jail since 21.02.2019. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail of the applicant by contending that the innocence of the applicant cannot be adjudged at pre trial stage, therefore, he does not deserves any indulgence. In case the applicant is released on bail he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions that :-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) 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.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) 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. is issued and the applicants fail 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.
(v) 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.
In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 28.2.2020