Allahabad High Court
Yogesh Kumar Awasthi vs State Of U.P Through Secretary ... on 24 May, 2022
Bench: Vivek Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4172 of 2022
Applicant :- Yogesh Kumar Awasthi
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Through Secretary Home And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Narendra Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel on behalf of applicant and Sri Sanjay Singh, learned AGA for the State.
The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Yogesh Kumar Awasthi with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 448 of 2020 under Sections 376, 354, 342, 228-A, 501, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station- Fatehgarh District- Farrukhabad, during pendency of trial.
It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is next contended that in medical report, age of the victim was found to be 18 years. It is further submitted that neither applicant was not named in the F.I.R. nor his name has come in the statements of the victim. It is further submitted that earlier anticipatory bail was granted to the applicant vide order dated 21.12.2021 by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Crl. Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/s 438 Cr.P.C. No. 19219 of 2021 till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.. Several other submissions in order to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against the applicant have also been placed forth before the Court. The circumstances which, according to the counsel, led to the false implication of the accused has also been touched upon at length. It has been assured on behalf of the applicant that he is ready to cooperate with the process of law and shall faithfully make himself available before the court whenever required. It has been pointed out that the applicant has no criminal history.
Learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer for bail.
Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and his antecedents, the applicant is entitled to be released on anticipatory bail in this case.
Let the applicant involved in the aforesaid crime be released on anticipatory bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-
1. The applicant shall not leave India during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
2. The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned trial Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned trial Court.
3. That the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
4. The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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 to ensure presence of the applicant.
5. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the trial Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi)- 2020 SCC Online SC 98.
6. 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 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 :- 24.5.2022/A.P. Pandey
