Allahabad High Court
Aakash Singh vs State Of U.P. & 2 Ors. on 9 July, 2019
Bench: Pritinker Diwaker
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 15
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1971 of 2018
Appellant :- Aakash Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & 2 Ors.
Counsel for Appellant :- Pawan Kumar Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate,Pranshu Agrawal,Raghvendra Pandey
Hon'ble Pritinker Diwaker,J.
Heard Sri Pawan Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Jyoti Prakash, learned counsel for the State. None for respondents 2 and 3 though noticed and served.
Appeal is formally admitted for hearing.
With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the appeal is heard finally.
Challenge in the present appeal is to the impugned order dated 12.09.2018 passed by the Second Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lucknow in Bail Application No.4813 of 2018, whereby the Special Court has rejected the bail application filed by the appellant under Section 439 of Cr PC, arising out of Crime No.324/2018, initially registered under Section 366 of IPC and later on converted into Sections 366, 376 of IPC and Section 3 (2) (v) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Hassanganj, District Lucknow.
As per prosecution case, on 14.6.2018, FIR was lodged by Smt. Maya Devi, mother of the prosecutrix, alleging in it that the appellant and the prosecutrix were in talking terms and quite often they used to have chat on their cell phone. She has alleged that on 10.6.2018, the prosecutrix eloped with the appellant, who was later contacted and it was mutually decided to exchange Aadhar Card, so that further formalities for marriage can be completed. It is further alleged that later, the prosecutrix was recovered from the company of the appellant.
Counsel for the appellant submits that:
(i) from a bare perusal of FIR, lodged by the complainant, it is apparent that present is a case of love affair between the appellant and the prosecutrix;
(ii) age of the prosecutrix is about 22 years;
(iii) in her 161 and 164 of Cr PC statements, the prosecutrix has improved and has made allegation of rape; and
(iv) from the conduct of the prosecutrix, it is apparent that she was a consenting party and a very improbable story has been put forth by the prosecution.
On the other hand, learned State Counsel opposes the submission of appellant. He, however, does not dispute the age of the prosecutrix.
Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, in particular the nature of allegations levelled against the appellant and further considering the surrounding circumstances as well as the evidence collected by the prosecution, without further commenting on merit, I am inclined to allow the appeal. Accordingly, the instant appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set aside.
Let appellant Aakash Singh 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 appellant 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 appellant 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 appellant 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 appellant 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 appellant 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 within a period of one year after the release of the appellant.
However, it is made clear that any willful violation of above conditions by the appellant 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 :- 9.7.2019
RKK/-
