Allahabad High Court
Aash Mohd. vs State Of U.P. on 16 January, 2023
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48921 of 2022
Applicant :- Aash Mohd.
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Zafar Abbas,Anuj Kumar Gupta
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pradeep Kumar
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Sri Anuj Kumar Gupta and Sri Rahul Dev Gupta, learned counsels for the applicant, Sri Pradeep Kumar Kashyap ,learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
There is allegation against the applicant made by his widow sister-in-law (bhabhi), that he has committed the offence of rape on the promise of marriage and has refused to marry her.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the first information report has been lodged only to pressurise the applicant and his family members to get her marriage performed with the applicant. It is a case of false implication. Applicant is in jail since 28.09.2022 and has no criminal history.
Learned counsel for the informant has vehemently opposed the bail application and has submitted that the applicant had promised the victim to marry her. She is thrown out from her matrimonial home. She has one girl child born from her deceased husband and is living with her parents.
Learned AGA has also opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the above submissions.
Considering the rival submissions, this court finds that both the views are probable and it is a fit case for granting of bail at this stage.
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, larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering 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 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, Aash Mohd, involved in Case Crime No.162 of 2022, under Sections 376(D), 323, 506 I.P.C, Police Station Pakbada, District- Moradabad 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.
The trial court is directed to conclude the trial against the applicant as expeditiously as possible, preferable within a period of one year from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
Order Date :- 16.1.2023
SS
