Allahabad High Court
Smt. Saniya Urf Soni And Another vs State Of U.P. on 5 January, 2023
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 38145 of 2022
Applicant :- Smt. Saniya Urf Soni And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Rabindra Bahadur Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A for the State.
The applicant was initially implicated under Section 376 IPC read with other Sections but subsequently his implication under Section 376 IPC has not been found to be proved and he has been implicated under Sections 366, 406, 506 and 120-B IPC. However, a coordinate Bench of this court by the order dated 21.11.2022 has directed this case to be listed before the appropriate Court as fresh on an early date.
Counsel for the applicant submits that the bail application was correctly filed before the court hearing minor bail applications but on account of earlier implication of the applicant under Section 376 IPC, this bail application has been listed before this Court which has jurisdiction to hear the major bail applications.
Considering the fact that a coordinate Bench of this Court has directed this case to be listed before this Court for hearing on the impression that it is bail application to be heard by court hearing major bail applications, this Court although finds that there was no need of placing this bail application before this Court but considering the fact that the application is being transferred from one Court to other, this Court is proceeding to hear this bail application.
There is allegation against the applicants that they have committed offence of breach of trust and also conspiracy and have abducted the victim and committed the offence of rape against her.
Counsel for the applicant submits that it is a case of false implication by the victim. She willingly befriended the applicants for personal gains at Haryana. Thereafter, she has falsely implicated them after about 16 months of the incident. The allegation regarding commission of offence of rape was found to be incorrect. The applicants have been falsely implicated in this case. They are in jail since 08.07.2022 and have no criminal history to their credits.
On the other hand learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail.
Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, 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 applicants, Smt. Saniya Urf Soni and Sateesh, involved in Case Crime No. 812 of 2021, under Sections- 366, 406, 506 and 120-B IPC, Police Station- Jagdishpura, District- Agra, be released on bail on their 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 applicants shall not tamper with the evidence or threaten the witnesses.
(ii) The applicants shall file an undertaking to the effect that they 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 applicants shall remain present before the Trial Court on each date fixed, either personally or as directed by the Court. In case of their absence, without sufficient cause, the Trial Court may proceed against them under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(iv) In case the applicants misuse the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure their 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 them in accordance with law under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
(v) The applicants 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 applicants are 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 them in accordance with law.
In case, of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 5.1.2023
Rohit
