Allahabad High Court
Ram Dulari vs State Of U.P. And Another on 6 May, 2024
Author: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:80479
Court No. - 74
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4533 of 2024
Applicant :- Ram Dulari
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Adarsh Bhushan,Arpan Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
1.Ari Ajay Kumar Patel, Advocate has filed vakalatnama on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 is taken on record.
2. Heard Mr. Adarsh Bhushan, learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record.
3. This anticipatory bail application (under section 438 Cr.P.C.) has been moved seeking bail in Case Crime No.0168 of 2023, under Sections 376 (3)/120 B IPC and 3/4 Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Sandeepan Ghat, District Kaushambi.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present case just to harass the applicant in fact no such incident has taken place as alleged in the impugned FIR. The applicant has never committed any offence as alleged in the impugned FIR. The applicant is mother of the victim. Initially, the impugned FIR has been lodged under Section 363 and 366 IPC but after recovery of the victim and on the basis of statement of the victim and informant recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C the investigating officer has submitted charge sheet under Section 376 (3) and 120-B IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act and the court below has summoned the applicant. He further submits that the brother of the victim has filed a complaint and statement of complainant and the victim under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C. were recorded. The victim has clearly stated in her statement under Section 202 Cr.P.C. that Nanka, who enticed her away, has given threat to give statement against her mother and the applicant, due to this reason, her mother and applicant have been made an accused during investigation. He further submits that the victim in her statement recorded under Sections 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. has levelled allegation of rape under the pressure of police. From perusal of statement of the victim under Sections 161, 164 Cr.P.C. as well as 202 Cr.P.C., no alleged offence is made out against the applicant. It has further submitted that co-accused Devendra Singh, has already been granted anticipatory bail in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 4460 of 2024 vide order dated 3.5.2024, therefore the applicant is also entitled to grant anticipatory bail. The applicant has no criminal history.
5.Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail of the applicant but could not dispute the aforesaid contentions raised by learned counsel for the applicant.
6. Hence without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusations and antecedents of applicant, he is directed to be enlarged on anticipatory bail as per the Constitution Bench judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2020 SCC Online SC 98. The future contingencies regarding anticipatory bail being granted to applicant shall also be taken care of as per the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court.
7. In the event of arrest, the applicant shall be released on anticipatory bail. Let the applicant- Ram Dulari involved in the aforesaid case crime be released on anticipatory bail till conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall co-operate with the Investigating Officer during investigation and shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when required for the purpose of conducting investigation.
(ii) 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.
(iii) The applicant shall not leave the country during the currency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.
(iv) The applicant shall surrender his passport, if any, to the concerned Court forthwith. His passport will remain in custody of the concerned Court.
(v) 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.
(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail, the Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law and judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sushila Aggarwal vs. State (NCT of Delhi) 2020 SCC Online SC 98.
(vii) 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 his in accordance with law.
8. In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/ Investigating Officer/ first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicant.
9. With the aforesaid observations/ directions, the application is disposed of.
Order Date :- 6.5.2024/A.
