Allahabad High Court
Raja vs State Of U.P. on 21 February, 2023
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3349 of 2023
Applicant :- Raja
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Surya Bhan Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
Seven persons have been implicated in the first information report lodged under Section 363 I.P.C. with regard to incident dated 14.06.2022 on 22.06.2022.
Learned counsel for the applicant has pointed out that out of seven named accused in the first information report, Ramu, Lakhman, Jetu, Ramesh Kashyap, Amarwati belong to the one family. Applicant and Dinesh, are real brothers and the co-accused, Amarwati, is their Mausi. Five co-accused of one family belong to village Ujani, District Budaun. Applicant and co-accused, Dinesh, belong to village Sungarhi, Kashganj. It is alleged in the first information report that all the accused have abducted the victim aged about 19 years. In the statement of the victim she has levelled allegation against the applicant and co-accused are that they abducted the victim and thereafter committed gang rape and then sold to her one person. She does not knows the name of the person to whom the applicant sold her.
Learned counsel for the applicant has pointed to the recovery memo of the victim, wherein the police has recorded that on 20.09.2022 information was received from the brother of the victim that she is back to his house. Thereafter investigating officer asked him from where then he told the investigating officer that she has not reached his house as yet but she is in a village and he is going to bring her. The investigating officer asked him location of the victim and asked him to take him along but he refused. Thereafter victim came to the police along with one, Gaurav, in a car and thereafter brother of the victim, Sonu came to the police station. It is not known who was the Gaurav. It is a case of false implication. Applicant and co-accused saw the victim in compromising position with some boy when she left her house on 14.06.2022. Thereafter applicant and co-accused have been falsely implicated in this case. Applicant is in jail since 15.10.2022.
Learned AGA has opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above submissions.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused; submissions of the learned counsel for the parties noted above; finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping view the uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under trial having fundamental right to speedy trial; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India and recent judgment dated 11.07.2022 of the Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil vs. C.B.I., passed in S.L.P (Crl.) No. 5191 of 2021 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by the under trials 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, Raja, involved in Case Crime No.400 of 2022, under Sections 147, 363, 366, 328, 368, 376(D), 341 I.P.C, Police Station Ujhani, District- Budaun 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 not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) 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.
(iii) The applicant shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) 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 applicants 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.
(v) 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.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, the complainant is free to move an application for cancellation of bail before this court.
Identity and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 21.2.2023
SS
