Allahabad High Court
Toofan Singh vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 27 June, 2022
Bench: Manish Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 10
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 6393 of 2022
Applicant :- Toofan Singh
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.
Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Singh,Ravindra Gupta
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State and perused the record.
2. This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.37 of 2007 under Sections 376, 504, 506 I.P.C. P.S. Ramgaon, District Bahraich.
3. As per the allegations made in the first information report, the incident is stated to have occurred on 20.09.2006 when the applicant is alleged to have outraged the modesty of the complainant in her house at about 11.00 p.m. It has been stated that certain persons indicated in the first information report came to her rescue upon her screaming and shouting for help whereupon the applicant escaped.
4. Learned counsel for applicant submits that the first information report has been lodged with delay of about five months, the incident is said to have occurred on 20.09.2006 and the first information report having been lodged on 11.02.2007 through an application moved under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. It is submitted that as such it is apparent that the allegations made against the applicant are clearly fabricated and are result of afterthought. It is submitted that earlier the applicant had been incarcerated in another Case No.14 of 2012 arising out of Case Crime No.769 of 2008 under Section 3(1) U.P. Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 & 302/34, 452, 506 I.P.C. He has been enlarged on bail only recently vide order dated 19.04.2022 passed in Criminal Appeal No.1065 of 2018 but has been arrested in the present crime on 18.04.2022. It is stated that there is no progress whatsoever with regard to trial of present case crime and even remand has not been sought by the opposite parties pertaining to the same, although a long time has passed since submission of charge-sheet in the present crime number in the year 2008 itself. It is submitted that there is no occasion for the applicant now to either abscond or to interfere with the trial process.
5. Learned Additional Government Advocate appearing on behalf of State has opposed the bail application but does not dispute the fact that the applicant was incarcerated in another case crime number and has recently been admitted to bail vide order dated 19.04.2022 as indicated hereinabove.
6. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Sanjay Chandra v. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40 has specifically held that bail is to be a norm and an under-trial is not required to be in jail for ever pending trial. Relevant paragraphs of the judgment are as under :-
"21. In bail applications, generally, it has been laid down from the earliest times that the object of bail is to secure the appearance of the accused person at his trial by reasonable amount of bail. The object of bail is neither punitive nor preventative. Deprivation of liberty must be considered a punishment, unless it is required to ensure that an accused person will stand his trial when called upon. The courts owe more than verbal respect to the principle that punishment begins after conviction, and that every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and duly found guilty."
"27. This Court, time and again, has stated that bail is the rule and committal to jail an exception. It has also observed that refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution."
7. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, without expressing any opinion on the merits of case, at this stage and subject to further evidence being led in trial, this Court finds, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
8. Accordingly bail application is allowed.
9. Let applicant Toofan Singh, 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 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 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 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 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.
Order Date :- 27.6.2022
kvg/-
