Allahabad High Court
Sunil vs State Of U.P. on 12 November, 2014
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 54
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26563 of 2014
Applicant :- Sunil
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- V.S. Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Heard Sri VS Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri LD Rajbhar, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that neither the applicant named in the FIR nor allegation of rape is reported against him. The applicant is being falsely implicated in this case due to village rivalry and also with ulterior motive as the complainant had taken a huge amount of loan from the applicant.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail.
Considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, reasonable apprehension of tempering of the witnesses and prima facie satisfaction of the Court in support of the charge, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
Let the applicant Sunil Kumar, son of Lala Ram involved in Case Crime No. 63 of 2014 under Section 376-D, 506 IPC and Section 6 POCSO Act, police station Bhuta, District Bareilly be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(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 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 case of Satish Kuamr Sharma is distinguishable from the case of co-accused Sunil Kumar.
Order Date :- 12.11.2014
SKS
