Allahabad High Court
Bharat vs State Of U.P. on 12 September, 2022
Bench: Manish Mathur
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 40208 of 2022
Applicant :- Bharat
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Shachindra Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.
Heard Sri Shachindra Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and perused the record.
This first bail application has been filed with regard to Case Crime No.19 of 2015, under Sections 376, 511, 323, 506 IPC, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Kaushambi.
Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his prayer for bail submits that the applicant is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the prosecutrix is herself first informant but she has not alleged commission of rape with her in the FIR. In her subsequent statement she has blamed the applicant to have committed rape with her. Prosecutrix is a married woman, medical evidence does not support the prosecution version. It is stated that co-accused Dinesh as well as Sugga have been enlarged on bail by coordinate Benches of this Court vide Criminal Misc. Bail Applications numbered 39380 of 2016 and 18786 of 2018 respectively. It is averred that the applicant has no previous criminal history.
Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for grant of bail.
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."
Keeping in view that all three named accused were charged for attempting to rape upon the victim, out of which the prime accused Dinesh, has been enlarged on bail by a coordinate Bench of this Court, referred to herein above and the case of the present applicant is on similar and identical footing as of co-accused Dinesh, he is also liable to be enlarged on bail.
Therefore considering the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, I am of the view that the applicant has made out a case for bail.
Let applicant Bharat be released on bail in the aforesaid Case Crime Number on his furnishing personal bond and two reliable sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:-
(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 misuse 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 fail 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.
Any violation of above conditions will be treated misuse of bail and learned Court below will be at liberty to pass appropriate order in the matter regarding cancellation of bail.
Order Date :- 12.9.2022
kvg/-
