Allahabad High Court
Jitendra vs State Of U.P. on 8 July, 2019
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 26950 of 2019
Applicant :- Jitendra
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Rajpoot
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Sanjay Rajpoot, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Om Prakash Mishra, learned counsel for the State as well as perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed by the applicant-Jitendra with a prayer to enlarge him on bail in Case Crime No. 749 of 2016, under Sections 363, 366, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Saini, District-Kaushambi, during the pendency of the trial.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the first information report has been lodged on 2nd November, 2016 alleging therein that Kuldeep and Jitendra used to tease the daughter of the informant, namely, Seema Gautam. It has further been alleged that on 18th July, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. when the victim went to Bank for withdrawing the money of the scholarship, on the way, both the accused molested her and when she objected and shouted, both the accused forcefully kidnapped the victim, which incident was seen by some villagers. When the informant went to the place of both the accused for complaining about the same, parents of both the accused misbehaved with her. Therefore, under suspicion, the present first information report has been lodged against as many as six persons including both the accused. The present first information report has been lodged after four months from the date of incident, for which no plausible explanation has been given, which makes the prosecution case doubtful. Learned counsel for the applicant has brought on record a copy of photograph at page-20 of the paper book, which goes to show that the victim has already married some another person and she stayed with him happily. Learned counsel for the applicant has also drawn the attention of the Court to the affidavit of the informant, a copy of which is enclosed at page-16 of the paper book, wherein it has been stated that on coming to know that the victim was in Mumbai, she went to meet her, where she saw that the victim married one Sharif and she was staying happily. She did not want to come to her parental place and give any statement before the Police or Court. From the aforesaid, it is apparent that the applicant is not involved in commission of the alleged incident. The applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present due to suspicion only. The applicant has no criminal antecedents to his credit except the present one. It is next contended that there is no possibility of the applicant 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. The applicant shall also cooperate in the investigation of the present case. The applicant is in jail since 24th May, 2019.
Per contra, the learned A.G.A. 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. However, the learned A.G.A. could not dispute the factual submissions as urged by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the material on record as well as the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, 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.
(v) The applicant shall personally appear once in the first week of every month in the concerned Police Station. In case of any default, the In-charge, Police Station shall forthwith inform the concerned court about this breach.
In case of default of compliance with condition no. (ii) enumerated herein above, the order granting bail shall stand cancelled automatically and the court concerned shall issue non-bailable warrant in order to get the applicant arrested and lodge him in jail.
Office is required to communicate this order to the S.S.P. concerned who is required to convey this order to the concerned police station to ensure compliance of condition no.(v) as provided herein before.
The concerned court below which will accept the bail bonds is also directed to convey a photo copy of this order to the concerned police station so that the condition no. (v) provided herein before may be complied with.
It is clarified that the observations, if any, made in this order are strictly confined to the disposal of the bail application and must not be construed to have any reflection on the ultimate merits of the case.
(Manju Rani Chauhan, J.)
Order Date :- 8.7.2019
Sushil/-
