Allahabad High Court
Javed vs State Of U.P. Though It Principal ... on 19 October, 2022
Bench: Manish Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 43012 of 2022
Applicant :- Javed
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Though It Principal Secretary (Home)
Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Kumar
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. 108 of 2022 under Sections 376D, 342, 506, 120B IPC, P.S. New Mandi, District Muzaffar Nagar.
3. As per contents of FIR, the incident is said to have taken place on 22nd March, 2022 when the informant/victim was walking on the highway along with her husband. It is stated that persons named in the F.I.R. were following the couple and thereafter forced them into an open area whereafter the victim's husband was tied to a tree and victim was raped by the named accused.
4. It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Learned counsel for the applicant has next drawn the attention of this Court towards annexure-6 to the affidavit accompanying this bail application, which is the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. wherein only the allegation of eve teasing the victim has been levelled against the applicant. It is next contended that the applicant has not committed the offence in question and in view of the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. no offence under the charged Sections is made out against the applicant. 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 also been submitted that the applicant is languishing in jail since 23.3.2022. It has been pointed out that the applicant has no criminal history.
5. Learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of State has opposed bail application with the submission that a case of molestation in any case is made out against the applicant.
6. Considering submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and upon perusal of material on record, prima facie subject to evidence led in trial, it appears that applicant is not named in the F.I.R. and his name has been introduced only during subsequent statement of prosecutrix under section 161 Cr.P.C. However it also appears that in her statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C., an allegation of only eve teasing has been levelled against the applicant. As such there appears to be contradiction in the statement of prosecutrix recorded under Section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. as well as the F.I.R. Co-accused Abid having a similar role has already been enlarged on bail by co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 44342 of 2022.
7. 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."
8. Looking to the nature of allegations levelled against the applicant and submission made in the bail application, without expressing any opinion on the merits of case and considering the nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence, particularly since no reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witnesses has been alleged, prima facie, this Court finds, the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
9. Accordingly bail application is allowed.
10. Let applicant Javed 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 :- 19.10.2022
Prabhat
