Allahabad High Court
Ashwani vs State Of U.P. on 21 August, 2023
Bench: Rajeev Misra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:168120
Court No. - 65
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 34548 of 2023
Applicant :- Ashwani
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
1. Heard Mr. Pradeep Yadav, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State.
2. Perused the record.
3. This application for bail has been filed by the applicant Ashwani seeking his enlargement on bail in Case Crime No. 175 of 2023, under Sections 376, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Saraimeer, District Azamgarh during the pendency of the trial.
4. Record shows that an F.I.R. datd 17.6.2023 was lodged by first informant/prosecutrix namely Asiya Fatima and was registered as Case Crime No. 0175 of 2023, under Sections 376, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Saraimeer, District Azamgarh. In the aforesaid F.I.R. the applicant Ashwani has been nominated as solitary named accused.
5. The gravamen of the allegations made in the F.I.R. is to the effect that the applicant Ashwani on the basis of false promise of marriage extended by him is alleged to have dislodged the modesty of the prosecutrix for almost two years. However, ultimately, the applicant is said to have resiled from the said promise.
6. Learned counsel for applicant contends that though the applicant a named as well as charge sheeted accused inasmuch as charge-sheet has been submitted against the applicant on 30.7.2023 yet he is innocent and is liable to be enlarged on bail. He has then invited the attention of the Court to the F.I.R. giving rise to the present criminal proceedings and on basis thereof, he submits that there is no mention regarding the day, date and time of the place of occurrence in the requisite column of the F.I.R nor in the body of the F.I.R. no detail with regard to the place of occurrence has been mentioned. The prosecutrix is major and a consenting party. There is delay in lodging the F.I.R. Therefore, by virtue of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Mandar Deepak Pawar Vs. State of Maharashtra and another in Criminal Appeal No. 442 of 2022, the applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. Even otherwise applicant is a man of clean antecedents inasmuch as he has no criminal history to his credit except the present one. Applicant is in jail since 18.6.2023. As such has has undergone more than two months of incarceration. The police report in terms of Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted. Therefore the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against the applicant stands crystallized. However up to this stage, no such circumstance has emerged necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant during pendency of trial. He, therefore, submits that applicant is liable to be enlarged on bail. In case, the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail and shall cooperate with the trial.
7. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for bail. He submits that since applicant is a named and charge sheeted accused, therefore he does not deserve any indulgence by this Court. The applicant is guilty of dislodging the modesty of prosecutrix repeatedly and continuously for almost two years on the promise of marriage but subsequently resiled from the promise so made, it is thus urged that no sympathy be shown by this Court in favour of applicant. However, he could not dislodge the legal and factual submissions urged by the learned counsel for applicant with reference to the record at this stage.
8. Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State, and upon perusal of record, evidence, accusations made, complicity of accused, nature and gravity of offence and coupled with the fact that the day, date and time of the occurrence has not been mentioned in the requisite column of the F.I.R. nor in the body of the F.I.R., the date of the refusal alleged to have been made by the applicant is also not mentioned in the F.I.R., the prosecutrix is major and willingly consensual relationship was made, as such, the F.I.R is highly delayed, however the delay in lodging the F.I.R. has not been explained, therefore, in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Mandar Deepak Pawar (supra) and also the fact that the applicant is a man of cleans antecedents having no criminal history to his credit except the present one, applicant is in jail since 18.6.2023, as such has has undergone more than two months of incarceration, the police report in terms of Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. has already been submitted, therefore the entire evidence sought to be relied upon by the prosecution against the applicant stands crystallized and also the fact that present case is a case of breach of promise to marry and not a false promise of marriage as there was nothing false from the inception, yet in spite of above, the learned A.G.A. could not point out any such circumstance necessitating the custodial arrest of applicant during pendency of trial, the judgment of the Supreme Court in Sumit Subhash Chandra Gangwal and another Vs. State of Maharashtra and another 2023 Live Law SC 373(5), but without making any comments on the merits of the case the applicant has made out a case for bail.
9. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.
10. Let the applicant Ashwani involved in Case Crime No. 175 of 2023, under Sections 376, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Saraimeer, District Azamgarh be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two heavy sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions.
i. The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.
ii. The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.
iii. The applicant will appear before the trial court on the date fixed, unless personal presence is exempted.
ix. The applicant shall not commit an offence similar to the offence of which he is accused, or suspected, of the commission of which he is suspected.
x. The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
11. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to move bail cancellation application before this Court.
Order Date :- 21.8.2023
Aiman
