Allahabad High Court
Shiv Kumar vs State Of U.P. on 15 July, 2021
Bench: Alok Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 14
Case :- BAIL No. - 6182 of 2020
Applicant :- Shiv Kumar
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Dilip Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
1. Heard Sri Dilip Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the records.
2.The present bail application has been filed by the applicant in case Crime No.24 of 2020 under Sections 363, 366, 376 D, 328, 506 of I.PC and 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station- Dalmau, District- Raebareli.
3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that a perusal of the statements recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. of the prosecutrix it is clearly indicated that it was the applicant who held her hand while Pinku sexually assaulted her. She has further stated that at the time when she was sexually assaulted by Pinku she was alone with him. It is further submitted that she refused to be medically examined and, therefore, it is very difficult in present circumstances to state whether she was sexually assaulted.
4.Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.
5.Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the contesting parties and having perused the records what is apparent from a perusal of the FIR is that applicant the Court finds this to be a fit case for grant of bail. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
6. Let the applicant Shiv Kumar involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions :-
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall not threaten or harass the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) 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.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.
(v) 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 CrPC (iv) argument / judgment.
(vi) 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.
(vii) Since the certified copy of this order, in view of the COVID-2019 pandemic, may not be easily available to the applicant, the applicant may file computer generated copy of this order from the official website of this Court and self- attested by the learned counsel for the applicant, before the concerned Magistrate/Court/Authority/Official.
(viii) The concerned Magistrate/Court/Authority/ Official, before accepting such computerized copy, filed by the applicant, as genuine, shall verify its authenticity from the official website of this Court.
(ix) Office is also directed to send a computerized copy of this order to the District Judge concerned through e-mail or the fax, as the case may be, forthwith.
7. It is provided that none of the observations made above shall be considered by the trial court and the trial shall proceed on its own merits.
Order Date :- 15.7.2021
RKM.
