Allahabad High Court
Jitendra Kumar vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 31 October, 2023
Bench: Siddharth
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:209572
Court No. - 64
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 41655 of 2023
Applicant :- Jitendra Kumar
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Siya Ram Sahu
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Amit Kumar,Babita Upadhyay
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.
Heard Sri Siya Ram Sahu, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Amit Kumar, learned counsel for the informant, Mrs. Babita Upadhyay, learned counsel for High Court Legal Services Committee and learned A.G.A. for the State.
There is allegation against the applicant of committing the offence of rape against a minor girl.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the victim is aged about 18 years. She wanted to marry the applicant and their marriage was to be solemnized, but due to objection by her grandfather their marriage could not be taken place. Now before the Special Judge, (POCSO Act), Banda both the victim and her mother have given affidavits that the prosecutrix and her mother are willing for marriage of victim with the applicant but because of objection from her grandfather, the marriage could not be performed earlier. The victim is pregnant by six months and she has met the applicant in jail alongwith her mother. The applicant is in jail since 04.05.2023.
Learned counsel for the informant has no objection in case the applicant is enlarged on bail.
Accordingly, the applicant is directed to be enlarged on bail for period of three months. He will get his marriage registered with the victim and file married certificate before this Court on the next date.
However, learned A.G.A has opposed the prayer for bail.
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.
Let the applicant, Jitendra Kumar, involved in Case Crime No. 173 of 2023, under Section 376(3) IPC and 5/6 POCSO Act, Police Station Bisanda, District Banda be released on interim bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned for a period of three months 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 misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence, proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails 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, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the court concerned before the bonds are accepted.
List this case again on 29.01.2024.Till then applicant will be released on bail.
In failure to comply this order, the interim bail for the period of three months, granted to the applicant, shall stand cancelled and he shall be taken into custody forthwith.
Order Date :- 31.10.2023
Vikram
