Allahabad High Court
Dinesh Maurya vs State Of U.P. on 1 August, 2019
Bench: Pritinker Diwaker
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 48
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 1175 of 2019
Applicant :- Dinesh Maurya
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Singh, D.S. Pawar
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Indrajeet Chaurasia
Hon'ble Pritinker Diwaker,J.
Heard Sri Dheeraj Singh Pawar, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Ankit Prakash, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This bail application under Section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the applicant seeking enlargement on bail during the trial in connection with Crime No. 398 of 2017, under Sections 420, 406, 342, 328, 376, 506 of IPC., Police Station Gagaha, District Gorakhpur.
As per prosecution case, on 18.8.2018, an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. was filed by the prosecutrix. Based on which FIR was registered on 7.11.2017 against the applicant under Sections 420, 406, 342, 328, 376D, 506 of IPC. In the FIR, the prosecutrix, a married lady, has alleged that she fell in the trap of the applicant who assured her for providing a job and that he has taken Rs.27,000/- from her. She has further alleged that she lived with the applicant for more than a month at Lucknow where she was subjected to physical relation as well.
Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his application for bail submits that a highly improbable story has been put forth by the prosecutrix, a major married lady, aged about 25 years. He submits that as per own saying of the prosecutrix, she remained with the applicant for couple of months without offering any protest or resistance. It has been further argued that that the prosecutrix, if at all, lived with the applicant, she was a consenting party. Lastly, it has been argued that the applicant is in jail since 12.9.2018 and the trial is likely to take some time to conclude the trial and therefore, he be released on bail.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A opposes the application for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular, the nature of allegation and the statement of the prosecutrix, without further commenting on merit, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail.
The bail application is allowed.
Let applicant Dinesh Maurya be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- (Fifty Thousand) and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he/she shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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/her counsel. In case of his/her absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him/her under section 229-A I.P.C.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his/her presence proclamation under section 82 Cr.P.C., may be issued and if applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him/her, in accordance with law, under section 174-A I.P.C.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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/her in accordance with law.
(v) The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavour and try to conclude the trial expeditiously after the release of the applicant.
However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant, shall have serious repercussion on his/her bail so granted by this court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.
Order Date :- 1.8.2019
RK
