Allahabad High Court
Umesh Yadav @ Abhishek Yadav vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 10 January, 2023
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 48063 of 2022
Applicant :- Umesh Yadav @ Abhishek Yadav
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar,Kalp Dev Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kamlesh Kumar Yadav
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Sri Kalp Dev Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Kamlesh Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
There is allegation against the applicant of commission of offence of gang rape in the first information report. It is alleged that from the scene of incident a mobile phone was recovered.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the Investigating Officer has collected evidence and has found a mobile phone on the site belong to one, Gopi Chauhan, of Azamgarh. The aforesaid Gopi Chauhan lost his mobile phone somewhere, which was being used by the victim. She used to talk to Veeru Vishwakarma, Son of Jawahar Vishwakarma of Ghazipur. At the time of alleged incident location of mobile phone of Veeru Vishwakarma and the victim have been found on same place. It has been submitted that the victim had affair and physical relation with the aforesaid Veeru Vishwakarma. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case because he saw them together. Applicant has no criminal history and he is in jail since 18.07.2022.
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, 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, Umesh Yadav @ Abhishek Yadav, involved in Case Crime No.111 of 2022, under Sections 376-D I.P.C and Section 3/4 POCSO Act and Section 3(2)V of SC/St Act, Police Station Bahariyabad, District- Ghazipur 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, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
Order Date :- 10.1.2023
SS
