Allahabad High Court
Rajnesh Alias Ratnesh vs State Of U.P. on 1 November, 2022
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Reserved On:- 18.10.2022
Delivered On:- 01.11.2022
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 30887 of 2022
Applicant :- Rajnesh Alias Ratnesh
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Singh Bais
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A., Girish Kumar Yadav
Hon'ble Siddharth, J.
1. Heard Shri A.K.S. Bais, learned counsel for the applicant; Shri Girish Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A.
2. There is allegation in the FIR against the applicant and four unknown accused regarding abduction of a girl with intent to marry.
3. Counsel for the applicant submits that it is a case of false implication. The victim willingly eloped with the applicant. As per the ossification test report of the victim, she was aged about 18 years at the time of incident. No injuries whatsoever were found on her body. From her statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., she appears to be a consenting party. She has admitted before the police that she went to Haridwar, Bareilly, etc., with applicant and she loves him. She has claimed her aged as 20 years. The applicant is in jail since 17.03.2022 and has no criminal history to his credit.
4. Counsel for the informant, Sri Girish Kumar Yadav, has vehemently opposed the bail application and has submitted that in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., she has made clear allegations against the applicant for committing the offence of her kidnapping and rape. He has submitted that the applicant is already married to one, Urmila on 19.02.2022 and has enticed away the victim who is minor. As per her educational certificate she was minor at the time of incident. He has finally submitted that the members of the family of the applicant have threatened the informant to withdraw the case and a complaint has been made by informant side to this effect before the police station. The trial has commenced and summons have been received by the informant from the court of ADJ- 2nd, Sambhal to appear on 20.10.2022. There is grave apprehension to the security of the witnesses of fact in case, the applicant is released on bail.
5. After hearing the counsel for the parties, this court is of the view that the applicant deserves to be released on bail only after the witnesses of fact are examined by the trial court and their statements are fully recorded. The trial court is directed to record the statements of the witnesses of fact in this case within a period of six months from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
6. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Dataram Singh Vs. State of U.P. and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22 and recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the Court is of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is allowed.
7. Let the applicant, Rajnesh Alias Ratnesh, involved in Case Crime No. 50 of 2022, under Sections- 366, 376 IPC, Police Station- Junawai, District- Sambhal, 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 subject to following conditions and only after the witnesses of fact are examined by the trial court and their statements are fully recorded. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(i) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) 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.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) 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.
(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 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.
In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 01.11.2022
Rohit
