Allahabad High Court
Ram Raj vs State Of U.P. And Another on 13 April, 2023
Bench: Rajeev Misra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 49
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 3855 of 2023
Appellant :- Ram Raj
Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Appellant :- Bipin Kumar
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Bipin Kumar, the learned counsel for appellant and the learned A.G.A. for State.
Admit.
Summon the lower court record.
(Order on the Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 61 of 2023)
Heard Mr. Bipin Kumar, the learned counsel for appellant and the learned A.G.A. for State.
Record shows that applicant-appellant has been convicted vide judgment and order dated 15.02.2023 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Additional Judge, POCSO Act, Court No.-9, Kaushambi in Case No. 135 of 2015 (State Vs. Ramraj and Others) under Sections 363, 366, 328, 368, 370(4), 376(2) IPC, Section 3/4 POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act, Police Station-Karari, District-Kaushambi whereby applicant-appellant has been convicted under Sections 363, 120B, 366/120B IPC. Consequently, applicant-appellant has been sentenced to 3 years rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs. 2,000/- under Sections 363, 120B IPC and 5 years rigorous imprisonment along with fine of Rs. 3,000/- under Sections 366/120B IPC. In case of default, in payment of fine, applicant-appellant is to undergo 1 month additional rigorous imprisonment.
Learned counsel for applicant-appellant submits that applicant-appellant has been convicted along with other co-accused under Section 120B IPC also. As such, the role of applicant-appellant is that of the conspirator. Applicant-appellant has not been convicted under Sections 3/4 POCSO Act and Section 3(2)(v) SC/ST Act. As such, no notice is required to be sent to the victim/informant. Maximum punishment awarded to applicant-appellant is below 5 years and there is no likelihood of the appeal being heard in near future.
It is further submitted that applicant-appellant is a man of clean antecedents having no criminal history to his credit except the present one. In case, the applicant-appellant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.
Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed the present application for bail. He submits that since appellant has been convicted by court below and crime committed by appellant is a crime against society, therefore, no indulgence by granted by this Court in favour of appellant. However, he could not dislodge the factual/legal submissions urged by the learned counsel for applicant-appellant at this stage
Having heard, the learned counsel for applicant-appellant, the learned A.G.A. for State and upon perusal of material brought on record as well as the complicity of applicant-appellant and accusation made coupled with the fact that the maximum sentence awarded to applicant-appellant is below 7 years and there being no chances of the appeal being heard in near future, applicant-appellant has made out a case for bail.
Accordingly, the bail application is Allowed.
Let the applicant-appellant-Ram Raj, be released on bail in aforesaid case crime number 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/SHE 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/HER COUNSEL. IN CASE OF HIS/HER ABSENCE, WITHOUT SUFFICIENT CAUSE, THE TRIAL COURT MAY PROCEED AGAINST HIM/HER UNDER SECTION 229-A IPC.
(iii) IN CASE, THE APPLICANT MISUSES THE LIBERTY OF BAIL DURING TRIAL AND IN ORDER TO SECURE HIS/HER 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/HER, 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 THE HIM/HER IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW.
(v) THE TRIAL COURT MAY MAKE ALL POSSIBLE EFFORTS/ENDEAVOUR AND TRY TO CONCLUDE THE TRIAL WITHIN A PERIOD OF ONE YEAR AFTER THE RELEASE OF THE APPLICANT.
However, it is made clear that any wilful violation of above conditions by the applicant-appellant, shall have serious repercussion on his bail so granted by this Court and the trial court is at liberty to cancel the bail, after recording the reasons for doing so, in the given case of any of the condition mentioned above.
Order Date :- 13.4.2023
Vinay
