Allahabad High Court
Manoj Kumar Shukla vs State Of U.P. on 1 March, 2019
Bench: Bachchoo Lal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 68
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 8493 of 2019
Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Shukla
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Surendra Mohan Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Bachchoo Lal,J.
Sri Tripathi B.G. Bhai and Sri Pramod Kumar Singh, learned counsel jointly filed Vakalatnama on behalf of complainant, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the complainant has moved an application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. against the applicant and one Sugreev which was treated as complaint and on the basis of statements of complainant and witnesses recorded under section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. the applicant has been summoned to face the trial under section 376, 341, 352 IPC. It has further been submitted that the complainant/victim in her complaint has made allegation of rape against the applicant and Sugreev but the Sugreev has not been summoned by the Magistrate concerned. Adesh Kumar and Bhoolan are said to be eye witnesses of the alleged occurrence but no person of the name of Adesh Kumar is residing in the village. Bhoolan has moved an application to the police station concerned that he does not know the applicant and Sugreev and there is no any person of the name of Adesh Kumar. It has further been submitted that in fact the victim is a married lady aged about 24 years. No such incident has taken place. There is no independent witness of the alleged occurrence. The victim has also lodged several cases against some person regarding sexual assault as Case Crime No. 670 of 2017, under section 354D, 506 IPC, P.S. Trilokpur, District Siddharth Nagar and one another FIR as Case Crime No. 3 of 2019, under section 354, 506 IPC, P.S. Trilokpur, District Siddharth Nagar. There is no medical report on record to support the prosecution version. The applicant has falsely been implicated in the present case. The applicant has no criminal history and is in jail since 16.1.2019.
Per contra; learned counsel for the complainant as well as learned A.G.A. have opposed the prayer for bail and argued that the victim in her complaint as well as in the statement recorded under section 200 Cr.P.C. has made allegation of rape against the applicant, therefore, he is not entitled for bail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it a fit case for bail.
Let the applicant Manoj Kumar Shukla involved in Criminal Complaint Case No. 1045 of 2018, under section 376, 341, 352 IPC, P.S. Trilokpur, District Siddharth Nagar be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
1. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence.
2. He shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses and shall cooperate with the trial.
3. He shall appear on each and every date fixed by the trial court unless personal appearance is exempted by the court concerned.
In case of breach of any conditions mentioned above, the trial court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail of the applicant.
Order Date :- 1.3.2019
Masarrat
