Allahabad High Court
Sanjay Pasi 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. - 16618 of 2018
Applicant :- Sanjay Pasi
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- A.L.Gupta,Brijesh Chandra Naik,Mukesh Kumar Yadav,Seema Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Counter and rejoinder affidavits filed today are taken on record.
Heard Mrs. Seema Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sheetal Prasad Chakravorty, learned counsel for the State and perused the record of the present bail application.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant ? Sanjay Pasi with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No.412 of 2017, under Sections 376, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of POSCO Act, Police Station Tharwai, District Allahabad.
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 on 05.07.2017 the applicant had given an application before the concerned authority against the informant Indra Rajee Devi and her brother-in-law Lalchand regarding their involvement in making illegal liquor. Annoyed by this, the present FIR has been lodged to falsely implicate the applicant with ulterior motive. As per the allegation in the FIR while the informant had gone to her parent's place, finding the victim alone, the applicant entered the house and sexually assaulted her. The victim in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. has supported the prosecution version. As per medical report, the victim is 16-18 years. It is argued that it is a case of false implication due to a complaint which was made against the informant as well as her brother-in-law with regard to making illegal liquor. Learned counsel has also pressed this bail application on the ground of period of detention as the applicant is languishing in jail since 30.10.2017. It is next contended that 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, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail. 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./-
