Allahabad High Court
Monu @ Praveen vs State Of U.P. on 13 September, 2022
Bench: Krishan Pahal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 78
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 28814 of 2022
Applicant :- Monu @ Praveen
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Dhaka
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Krishan Pahal,J.
Heard Sri Vivek Dhaka, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vibhav Anand Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
Applicant seeks bail in Case Crime No.375 of 2017, under Sections 376, 377, 406, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Brahmpuri, District Meerut, during the pendency of trial.
As per the allegations in the FIR, the applicant is said to have met the informant in the month of August, 2013 and later on is said to have engaged on 26 January, 2014. Later on, on the pretext of marrying her, the applicant is said to have entered into physical relationship with the informant for more than four years, but despite frantic efforts by the informant, he did not marry her. In the meantime, the applicant is also stated to have extracted an amount of Rs.2 lakhs and is stated to have provided her some jewellery in lieu of it, which was found to be fake.
Learned counsel for the applicant has stated that the applicant is absolutely innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case with a view to cause unnecessary harassment and to victimize him. It is a clear-cut case of consent. The victim is major. Learned counsel has placed much reliance on the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. which is indicative of embellishments with respect to the FIR. Learned counsel has further stated that as per the settled case law of the Apex Court, entering into physical relationship with a person is not an offence if it is done on the false promise of marriage. Several other submissions have been made on behalf of the applicant to demonstrate the falsity of the allegations made against him. The circumstances which, as per counsel, led to the false implication of the applicant have also been touched upon at length. It is further stated that there is no criminal history of the applicant. The applicant is languishing in jail since 30.05.2022. In case, the applicant is released on bail, he will not misuse the liberty of bail.
Learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the bail application on the ground that there are serious allegations as per the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C., but could not dispute the fact that there is no criminal history of the applicant and the consent of the victim cannot be ruled out.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence on record regarding complicity of the accused, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and 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 Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 825 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.
Let the applicant- Monu @ Praveen, who is involved in aforementioned 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 subject to following conditions. Further, before issuing the release order, the sureties be verified.
(i) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the date 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 IPC.
(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., may be issued and if 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 IPC.
(iv) The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the Trial Court on dates fixed for (1) opening of the case, (2) framing of charge and (3) 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.
It is made clear that observations made in granting bail to the applicant shall not in any way affect the learned trial Judge in forming his independent opinion based on the testimony of the witnesses.
Order Date :- 13.9.2022
Ravi Kant
