Allahabad High Court
Ankit Kumar Soni vs State Of U.P. & Another on 12 April, 2021
Bench: Virendra Kumar Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 33
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 249 of 2021
Appellant :- Ankit Kumar Soni
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Another
Counsel for Appellant :- Saurabh Srivastava,Km.Pratibha Vaish
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Virendra Kumar Srivastava,J.
In view of COVID-19 pandemic situation, the matter is being taken up through Video Conferencing.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
No one is present for opposite party no.2 despite the service of notice served upon him.
This appeal under Section 14A (2) Cr.P.C. has been filed against the judgment and order dated 21.01.2021, passed by Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Raibareli in Bail Application No.113 of 2021, arising out of Case Crime No.626/2020, under Sections-376, 323, 494 I.P.C. & 3 (2) (5) SC/ST Act, P.S.-Unchahar, District-Raibareli, whereby the bail application filed by the appellant has been rejected by the trial Court.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is innocent and has been falsely implicated due to matrimonial dispute with opposite party no.2. Learned counsel further submits that opposite party no.2 is legally wedded wife of the appellant and due to some dispute, she has falsely implicated the appellant in offence of rape as well as of bigamy. Learned counsel further submits that the applicant is major and is aged about 26 years. Learned counsel further submits that both offence under Section 376 I.P.C. and Section 494 I.P.C. cannot run concurrently.
Learned counsel further submits that appellant is a law abiding person and is languishing in jail since 19.12.2020 having no criminal history. Learned counsel further submits that the trial Court, without considering the material available on record, has dismissed the bail application. Learned counsel further submits that if the appellant is enlarged on bail, he will cooperate with the proceeding before the trial Court and therefore this appeal may be allowed.
Learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the prayer for bail but did not dispute the factual submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant. Learned A.G.A. further submits that in view of the gravity of the offence, appellant is not entitled for bail and there is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order passed by trial Court.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the arguments advanced on behalf of both the sides and keeping in view the fact that the trial of the case is not likely to be concluded in near future, the appeal has substance hence, this appeal and also bail application filed before the court below are allowed and order dated 21.01.2021 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act) Raibareli is hereby set aside.
Let appellant, Ankit Kumar Soni, be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:
1. The appellant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence, if 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;
2. The appellant 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;
3. In case, the appellant misuses the liberty of bail 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.
4. The appellant 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 12.4.2021
Mahesh
