Allahabad High Court
Anil Kumar Raidas Alias Noki vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 14 March, 2023
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 17
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 3541 of 2023
Applicant :- Anil Kumar Raidas Alias Noki
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Of U.P. Lucknow
Counsel for Applicant :- Ramakar Shukla
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.
1. Heard Mr. Abhinav Singh, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Ramakar Shukla, learned counsel for the accused-applicant, Mr. Vipul Gupta, learned Additional Government Advocate, as well as Mr. Pramod Kumar Verma, Advocate, who has put in appearance and filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of the complainant, and gone through the entire record.
2. By means of this 3rd application under Section 439 CrPC, the accused-applicant seeks bail in FIR No.0115 of 2018, under Sections 376, 506 and 452 IPC read with Section 3/4 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, lodged at Police Station Kurebhar, District Sultanpur.
3. The earlier two bail applications i.e. Bail Application No.8445 of 2018 and Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.101 of 2020 were rejected vide orders dated 02.04.2019 and 12.05.2022 respectively. While rejecting, the second bail application vide order dated 12.05.2022, this Court directed the trial Court to conclude trial and pronounce judgment expeditiously, say within a period of six months.
4. On behalf of the accused-applicant, it is submitted that six prosecution witnesses have been examined; despite issuing summons time & again, the investigating officer has not appeared to given his evidence and bailable warrants of arrest has been issued against him; the accused-applicant has been languishing in jail since 03.07.2018; the manner in which the trial is progressing would take further time in its conclusion; the accused-applicant has no other criminal antecedent except the present one; during the pendency of the trial, the accused-applicant has already undergone around 4 years and 8 months prison.
5. Though the learned AGA and learned counsel for the complainant have opposed the bail, but they are not in a position to dispute that the accused-applicant has already undergone more than 4 years and 8 months prison.
6. Considering the long incarceration of the accused-applicant in jail during trial, there is no other criminal antecedent of the accused-applicant and without commenting upon merit of the case, I find it to be a fit case for grant of bail.
7. Let applicant- Anil Kumar Raidas alias Noki, accused of above-mentioned FIR/crime number, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two local and reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned with the following conditions, which are imposed in the interest of justice:-
(i) the applicant(s) 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;
(ii). the applicant(s) shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code;
(iii). in case, the applicant(s) misuse(s) the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant(s) fail(s) 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; and
(iv) the applicant(s) 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.
[D.K. SINGH, J]
Order Date :- 14.3.2023
MVS/-
