Allahabad High Court
Binta vs State Of U.P. Through Its ... on 17 July, 2023
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:143024
RESERVED ON 11.7.2023
DELIVERED ON 17.7.2023
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37642 of 2022
Applicant :- Binta
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Through Its Secretary Home And 3 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Mukesh Kumar Kushwaha,Mahima Maurya Kushwaha
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ramesh Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Shri Mukesh Kumar Kushwaha learned counsel for the applicant; Shri Ramesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, Binta, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 12 of 2022, under Sections 376AB IPC and section 5/6 POCSO Act Police Station Khair, District- Aligarh, during pendency of trial.
There is allegation in the First Information Report that he has committed the offence of rape minor girl aged about 5 years. The First Information Report was lodged by her mother.
Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that it is a case of false implication of the applicant. He has referred to the medical examination report of the victim. In the medical report of the victim her hymen was found to be intact. There is prior enmity between the parties. On 2.11.2021 First Information Report was lodged by Yadram son of Nanumal Singh under sections 504/452 I.P.C. against the Viram Singh, Ishwari Prashad and Dori Lal. The present First Information Report has been lodged by Smt. Neerja Devi wife of Dori Lal, clearly Devi Lal was an accused in the earlier case under section 504/452 I.P.C. lodged by the other side.His two brothers, Viram Singh and Ishwari Prasad were also accused in the aforesaid case and have been enlarged on bail. In the medical report of the child victim the doctor had note that her Labia majora and Labia minora were swollen and painful. He has submitted that injuries are external and could have been caused by other means also to falsely implicate the applicant. He is in jail since 7.1.2022 and has no criminal history.
Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have vehemently opposed the bail prayer of the applicant and they have submitted that allegations against the applicant are serious,hence applicant does not deserves to be enlarged on bail.
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 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; 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 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.
1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
3. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
4. That the applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
5. The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and 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 to ensure presence of the applicant.
6. 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 default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
The trial court is directed to conclude the trial within a period one year.
The registrar(Compliance)of this court is directed to communicate this order to the trial court for compliance within ten days.
Order Date :- 17.7.2023
Atul kr. sri.
