Allahabad High Court
Sujeet Yadav vs State Of U.P & Anr on 15 March, 2021
Bench: Saroj Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 32
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 668 of 2020
Appellant :- Sujeet Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U.P & Anr
Counsel for Appellant :- Suresh Chandra Srivastava,S.P.Tiwari,Vijay Kumar Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Abhishek Pandey,Dharmendra Kumar Pandey
Hon'ble Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J.
Heard Mr. S.P. Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Abhishek Pandey, learned counsel for the complainant/victim and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This Criminal Appeal has been filed by the appellant against the judgment and order dated 11.02.2020 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act) Faizabad in Bail Application No.177 of 2020 (Sujeet Yadav Vs. State of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime No. 345 of 2019, under Sections 147, 452, 376, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Police Station Haiderganj, District Faizabad (now Ayodhya), rejecting the bail application of the accused/appellant.
Learned counsel for the accused/appellant argued that accused/appellant and victim had love affair and the physical relations were made with the mutual consent of the victim and accused/appellant. The victim is major about 29 years old. The accused/appellant never refused to marry and is still ready to marry with her. The victim herself has refused to marry him.
Learned counsel for the appellant referred the statement of victim recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., where she has stated now she is not ready to marry with the accused because earlier he refused to marry her infront of so many people. The accused/appellant is languishing in jail since 19.01.2020. Accused/appellant should be enlarged on bail.
Contrary to it learned counsel for the victim/complainant submitted that physical relations between the appellant and victim were were made on the assurance that accused/appellant will marry with victim. Victim/complainant is ready to marry, but appellant has refused. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the bail application.
Considered the rival submissions and also perused the record.
Considering all the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the statement of the victim/complainant referred under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. without commenting on merit, it appears just to enlarge the accused/appellant on bail.
Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and impugned order dated 11.02.2020 passed by learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act) Faizabad in Bail Application No. 177 of 2020 (Sujeet Yadav Vs. State of U.P.) arising out of Case Crime No. 345 of 2019, under Sections 147, 452, 376, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Police Station Haiderganj, District Faizabad (now Ayodhya), is set aside.
Let the appellant/accused Sujeet Yadav involved in Case Crime No. 345 of 2019, under Sections 147, 452, 376, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(2)(v) of SC/ST (P.A.) Act, Police Station Haiderganj, District Faizabad (now Ayodhya) 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 appellant 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 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.
(iii) In case, the applicant misuses 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 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 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.
(v) The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
(vi) The computer generated copy of such order shall be self attested by the counsel of the party concerned.
(vii) The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 15.3.2021
A.K. Singh
