Allahabad High Court
Bouby vs State Of U.P. on 1 August, 2019
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 18195 of 2018
Applicant :- Bouby
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Subhash Chandra Yadav,Sushil Dubey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ravindra Kumar Mishra
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Counter affidavit filed today is taken on record.
Heard Sri Subhash Chandra Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Madnesh Prasad Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant ?Bouby with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.82 of 2018, under Sections 452, 504, 506, 376 I.P.C & 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Sirsaganj, District Firozaqbad.
It is argued by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case due to ulterior motive. It is next argued that the FIR has been lodged by complainant Gautam Singh on 06.02.2018 at about 11 p.m. with the allegation that his sister-in-law who is 17 years old was all alone in her house as the informant along with his wife had gone to attend some marriage, then accused applicant Bouby finding the victim alone entered into the house and after sexually assaulting the victim ran away. Victim came out of the house and raised her voice. Few persons came and they informed the informant about the incident on telephone hence the FIR was lodged on 06.02.2018. It has been argued that in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. victim has stated that she is 17 years and has been falsely sexually assaulted by the applicant. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the litigation is pending between the parties regarding some dispute for which some case has been filed on 11.08.2015 in which Ram Kishore the father of the informant has been impleaded as opposite party no.3. Due to the aforesaid litigation, in order to take revenge the present FIR has been lodged by falsely implicating the applicant. It has also been submitted that the FIR under Section 376 I.P.C. was lodged against the informant by the applicant's side in which final report has also been submitted. It is next contended that the applicant has no criminal history and there is no possibility 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 and the applicant is languishing in jail since 18.02.2018. Accordingly, he requests for bail.
Per contra, learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail prayer 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.
Considering the material/evidence brought on record, the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh vs. State of U.P. and another, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, let the applicant 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 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.
However, the trial Court is directed to expedite the trial of the present case and conclude the same expeditiously from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, keeping in view the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Alakh Alok Srivastava Vs. Union of India and another reported in AIR 2018 (SC) 2440, if there is no legal impediment.
Office is directed to communicate the copy of this order forthwith to concerned court for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 1.8.2019
Anand Sri./-
