Raja Ram vs State Of U.P. And Another
2024 Latest Caselaw 18216 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Raja Ram vs State Of U.P. And Another on 21 May, 2024

Author: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery

Bench: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:91525
 
Court No. - 65
 

 
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL CANCELLATION APPLICATION No. - 183 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Raja Ram
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Brijesh Singh,Sushil Kumar Shukla
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Manoj Kumar
 

 
Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.
 

1. Heard S/Sri Brijesh Singh and Sushil Kumr Shukla, learned counsel for applicant, Sri D.P.S. Chauhan, learned AGA for State and Sri Manoj Kumar, learned counsel for accused.

2. This bail cancellation application was filed in the year 2023 to cancel bail of accused granted by learned trial Court on 24.01.2023 in Case Crime No. 896 of 2022 under Sections 363, 366, 376(2)N, 506 IPC and 5L/6 of POCSO Act, 2012, Police Station- Bahedi, District- Bareilly.

3. This Court has passed following order on 07.05.2024 :-

?1. S/Sri Brijesh Singh and Sushil Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for applicant are present and Sri Manoj Kumar, learned counsel for accused is not present.

2. According to learned counsel for applicant, victim is presently kidnapped and is residing along with accused who is on bail. If it is so, it is directed that accused along with victim shall remain present before this Court after two weeks.

3. Let a non-bailable warrant be issued to accused Karan S/o Jaipal R/o Village- Khirni, Police Station- Bahedi, District- Bareilly through Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bareilly to ensure his presence before this Court on next date fixed.

4. List this case on 21.05.2024.

5. Parties are at liberty to mention.

6. Registrar (Compliance) to take steps.?

4. Today, accused Karan is present under non-bailable warrant along with victim Rekha. The Court has inquired with accused and victim whether they are staying together on their own will to which victim stated in affirmative and that she is happy with accused.

5. Victim is now an adult girl. Parents of victim are also present though they are not happy with conduct of her daughter and Court has permitted them to talk with each other in presence of some women lawyers, however, nothing concrete came out. Parents of victim have requested this Court to cancel bail of accused so that accused remain in jail.

6. Learned counsel for parties have not disputed that victim has already deposed before trial Court though nature of her evidence is not on record. Victim has stated before this Court that she has mentioned before trial Court that she on her own will went with accused.

7. In aforesaid circumstances, I do not find that victim is illegally confined against her will by the accused. As stated before this Court, she is happily living with accused, therefore, no case of bail cancellation is made out and in this regard, Court takes note of judgment of Supreme Court in Himanshu Sharma vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2024 SCC Online SC 187.

8. So far as trial is concerned, since victim has already deposed before trial Court, therefore, it would be a subject matter of trial and for that trial Court is directed to conclude the trial expeditiously.

9. In order to ensure welfare of victim, it is directed that accused will deposit Rs. 1,00,000/- in bank account of victim before conclusion of trial and receipt thereof shall be placed before trial Court.

10. In case aforesaid amount is not deposited, trial Court will be at liberty to cancel bail of accused. Non bailable warrants are discharged.

11. Registrar (Compliance) to take steps.

Order Date :- 21.5.2024

N. Sinha