Allahabad High Court
Gokul vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 24 January, 2023
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 53070 of 2022
Applicant :- Gokul
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Kumar Dwivedi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Arvind Kumar
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
A complaint under Sections 363, 366, 376(D) I.P.C and 3/4 of POCSO Act was filed by the father of the victim against two named accused, Aniket and Mochan. In the statement of the witnesses recorded under Section 200 & 202 Cr.P.C, the name of the applicant surfaced as the person who was involved in the alleged offence and allegation of committing offence of gang rape has also been levelled against him.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that initially the daughter of the informant alleged that co-accused, Aniket was caught with her and victim refused to get herself medically examined. Therefore, he was let off from police custody. Subsequently compliant has been filed on the basis of false allegation. Applicant has been summoned and his bail applicant has been rejected by the court below. Therefore, applicant is before this court. He has been falsely implicated in this case on account of village politics by the victim. Victim has not got herself medically examined. The offence alleged cannot be proved before the court. The applicant is in jail since 03.11.2022 and has no criminal history.
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, 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, Gokul, involved in Case Crime No.5 of 2022, under Sections 363, 366, 376-D I.P.C and 3/4 of POCSO Act, Police Station Khetarari, District- Jaunpur 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 :- 24.1.2023
SS
