Allahabad High Court
Nevaji @ Ramji vs State Of U.P. on 19 January, 2021
Bench: Vikas Kunvar Srivastav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 30
Case :- BAIL No. - 11361 of 2019
Applicant :- Nevaji @ Ramji
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Soniya Mishra,Anjali Dubey,Rajiv Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vikas Kunvar Srivastav,J.
The case is called out.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajiv Mishra, Advocate and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present bail application is filed on behalf of the accused-applicant involved in Case Crime No.401/2018, under Sections 376, 363, 366 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station - Fatehpur-84, District- Unnao.
The occasion of present bail application arisen on rejection of bail plea of applicant by learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, POCSO Act, Unnao vide order dated 31.10.2019. A copy of the bail application has already been received in the office of G.A.
Learned counsel for the applicant reading over the F.I.R. submitted that on 02.12.2018 complainant's daughter aged about 16 years went to tailor's shop for taking her cloths. When she did not return, her family members made an assiduous search for her but all went in vain.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant-accused is innocent and has falsely been implicated in this case in vengeance as he was not agreed to enter in marriage with the victim. The family members of the victim and she herself were willing to marry with him. He has neither any criminal history nor has been convicted prior to this in any other case.
Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that there is no allegation against the applicant-accused with regard to rape by him in statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and Section 164 Cr.P.C. from which it is clear that she was consenting party and went with the applicant-accused on her own free will. He further submitted that on perusal of the medical report of the victim, it would be clear that the age of the victim is above 19 years and there is no evidence of commission of rape upon her.
Learned A.G.A vehemently opposed the bail application but has not disputed with the facts stated by learned counsel for the bail applicant.
Keeping into mind the valuable right of personal liberty and the fundamental principle not to disbelieve a person to be innocent unless held guilty and if he is not arraigned with the charge of an offence for which the law has put on him a reverse burden of proving his innocence as, held in the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors. reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, I find force in the submission of learned counsel for the bail-applicant to enlarge him on bail.
Looking into the fact of the alleged victim being major in age and the statements under Sections 161 Cr.P.C. and 164 Cr.P.C. revealing the consensuous nature of fact of her being with the accused. I find force in the submission of learned counsel for the applicant for grant of bail during trial.
After hearing, learned counsel for the parties with a view to ensure personal liberty of the accused-applicant so as to provide opportunity to defend him efficaciously in the course of trial, if he is not in a position to flee away from the process of the Court and is ready to abide himself from the conditions imposed in the bail order.
Without making any comment on merit as to the role, complicity of the accused-applicant in the offence, the prima facie case etc., the accused-applicant deserves to be granted bail.
Let applicant (Nevaji @ Ramji) involved in Case Crime No.401/2018, under Sections 376, 363, 366 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station - Fatehpur-84, District- Unnao be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following additional conditions, which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-
(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 their 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 misuse 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 applicants 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.
Order Date :- 19.1.2021
Gaurav/-
