Allahabad High Court
Raju @ Indal vs State Of U.P. on 1 May, 2015
Bench: Ramesh Sinha
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 17
Case :- BAIL No. - 1511 of 2015
Applicant :- Raju @ Indal
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Irfan Alam
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt.Advocate
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Heard Sri Irfan Alam, learned counsel for the applicant and Ms. Meera Tripathi, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that as per the statement of the prosecutrix recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. no allegation of rape has been levelled against the applicant as the same has been assigned to co-accused Sonu, who has been granted bail by another Bench of this Court vide order dated 25.3.2015 in Crl. Misc. Bail Application No. 1727 of 2015. He submits that the case of the applicant stands on much better footing to that of co-accused Sonu as the only allegation against the applicant is that he has brought the prosecutrix to the house of co-accused Sonu. The applicant has no criminal history. The applicant is in jail since 21.12.2014.
Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail.
Copy of the bail order of co-accused Sonu has been produced by learned counsel for the applicant which is taken on record.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and 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 Raju @ Indal involved in Case Crime No. 724 of 2014 under Sections 363, 366-A, 376-Gha IPC and 3/4/18 POCSO Act, police station Laliya, District Balrampur 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.
Order Date :- 1.5.2015
shiraz
