Allahabad High Court
[email protected] Lakhan vs State Of U.P. on 3 March, 2023
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 73
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 725 of 2023
Applicant :- [email protected] Lakhan
Opposite Party :- State of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Mishra,Krishna Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Lalit Kumar Shukla
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Shri Ashok Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant; Shri Lalit Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A.
The instant bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicant, [email protected] Lakhan, with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 887 of 2020, under Sections 376, 506 IPC Police Station Highway, District- Mathura, during pendency of trial.
There is allegation of gang rape against the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the informant has falsely implicated him for the third time by way of present FIR. Initially a complaint was filed by her husband in the year 2016 and the informant preferred an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No. 20332 of 2017 and the proceedings were stayed. The aforesaid application under Section 482 Cr.P.C was filed since the compromise was entered outside the court by the informant with applicant but it was not accepted by C.J.M and therefore the aforesaid application was filed by the informant before this court praying for quashing of the proceedings. The same is still pending. Thereafter the informant implicated the applicant for second time and an FIR was lodged by the husband of the informant as Case Crime No. 39 of 2017, under Section 364 IPC wherein the statement of the victim was recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C and she clearly stated that she has left the company and her husband because he used to beat her and thereafter on suspicion the applicant was implicated in this case. In this case, final report was submitted by the police. Now the applicant has been implicated in this case by the informant herself along with other co-accused persons. It has been submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the prosecutrix is a chronic litigant. She is habitual of extorting money by lodging false FIR against innocent persons of the village. The police after investigation has found that she is not residing in the village and residing somewhere else. The applicant has been falsely implicated in this case again.The applicant is in jail since 1.12.2022 and has no criminal history.
Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the informant have opposed the bail prayer of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
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.
In case the trial has commenced, the trial court will conclude the same within a period one year as per section 309 Cr.P.C.
Order Date :- 3.3.2023
Atul kr. sri.
