Allahabad High Court
Ramdas vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 17 March, 2023
Bench: Sanjay Kumar Pachori
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 89
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 51202 of 2022
Applicant :- Ramdas
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Faiz Hasnain,Mohd. Hasham,Syed Riyaz Askari
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Abida Syed
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.
Heard Sri Syed Riyaz Askari, Advocate holding brief of Shri Syed Faiz Hasnain, Ms. Abida Syed, learned counsel for opposite party no. 3 and 4 learned counsel for opposite party no. 3 and 4 and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
The present bail application has been filed on behalf of applicant Ramdas with a prayer to release him on bail in Case Crime No. 59 of 2022 for offence punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376 of the Indian Penal Code, and Section 6 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 registered at Police Station- Jalalpur District- Hamirpur during pendency of the trial, after rejecting the bail application of the applicant by Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO Act), Hamirpur vide order dated 22.09.2022.
Brief facts of the present case are that the first information report dated 01.05.2022 has been lodged by father of the victim under section 363 against the revisionist and two other unknown persons stating that on 26.04.2022 at about 11 AM, when his daughter aged about 16 years was alone in the house, the applicant and two unknown persons came and enticed away her daughter. Neighbours Meera and Dharmendra helped in the enticing away of his daughter.
After lodging of the first information report on 01.05.2022, statement of victim under section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded on 12.06.2022. Medical examination of the victim was conducted on 19.06.2022 and statement of the victim under section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded on 20.06.2022. After completing the investigation chargesheet had been submitted against the applicant on 14.07.2022. The applicant is languishing in jail since 09.07.2022.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. It is further submitted that as per educational certificate as mentioned in the documents produced by the applicant as well as order of trial court victim was 17 years 9 months 19 days old at the time of incident.
It is further submitted that as per statement under sections 161 and 164 of Cr.P.C. victim had gone from her house on her own free will because her father wanted to marry her with another boy and she had love affairs with the applicant for 4 to 5 months. It is further submitted that she travelled with the applicant and resided with the applicant for one and half months in Gujarat.
Per contra, learned A.G.A. has supported the order passed by the Sessions court and vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of bail to the applicant and submits that the allegations involved are very serious in nature and the delay in lodging the F.I.R. cannot be said to be fatal to the case at this juncture while considering the application of bail. But he could not point out any material to the contrary. He further submits that in case the applicant is released on bail, he will again indulge in similar activities and will misuse the liberty of bail.
After considering the facts of the present case it prima facie appears that:
(i) the victim was 17 years 9 months 18 days old at the time of incident.
(ii) As per statement of victim she had gone from her own free will from her house and she solemnized marriage in a temple on 26.04.2022.
(iii) There is contradiction between the allegation of first information report and the statement of the victim recorded under section 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. with regard to the fact of enticing away.
It is a settled law that while granting bail, the court has to keep in mind the nature of accusation, the nature of the evidence in support thereof, the severity of the punishment which conviction will entail, the character of the accused, the circumstances which are peculiar to the accused, his role and involvement in the offence, his involvement in other cases and reasonable apprehension of the witnesses being tampered with.
Taking into account the totality of facts and keeping in mind, the ratio of the Apex Court's judgment in the case of State of Rajasthan v. Balchand @ Baliay (1977) 4 SCC 308, Gudikanti Narasimhulu And Ors., v. Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1978 SC 429, Ram Govind Upadhyay v. Sudarshan Singh & Ors., (2002) 3 SCC 598, Prasanta Kumar Sarkar v. Ashis Chatterjee & Anr., (2010) 14 SCC 496 and Mahipal v. Rajesh Kumar & Anr., (2020) 2 SCC 118, the larger interest of the public/State and other circumstances, but without expressing any opinion on the merits, I am of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail. Hence, the present bail application is allowed.
Let applicant, Ramdas be released on bail in the aforesaid case crime number on his furnishing a personal bond and two reliable sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to the following conditions:
(i) 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 or tamper with the evidence.
(ii) The applicant shall not pressurize/intimidate the prosecution witnesses.
(iii) 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 of Cr.P.C.
(iv) 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 the trial court.
(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel.
(vi) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. If in the opinion of the trial court that 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 in accordance with law.
The trial court may make all possible efforts/endeavor and try to conclude the trial expeditiously in accordance with law after the release of the applicant, if there is no other legal impediment.
It is made clear that the observations made in this order are limited to the purpose of determination of this bail application and will in no way be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. The trial court shall be absolutely free to arrive at its independent conclusions on the basis of evidence led unaffected by anything said in this order.
The party shall file computer generated copy of such order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad, self attested by the applicant along-with a self attested identity proof of the said person (preferably Aadhar Card) mentioning the mobile number to which the said Aadhar Card is linked.
The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.
Order Date :- 17.3.2023
Saurabh
